BigHornRam
Well-known member
Wolf plan has critics, backers
By MATTHEW BROWN
Associated Press writer Wednesday, July 18, 2007
CODY -- Shielded by law from hunters, gray wolf populations boomed in the Northern Rockies over the last decade at the expense of some big game herds that represent a sure meal for the resurgent carnivores. But the balance of power in the region's forests could soon tilt against those 1,300 wolves.
Federal officials are seeking to give Idaho, Montana and Wyoming wider latitude to kill wolves that prey on big game species or threaten domestic animals. As public hearings on the proposal began Wednesday, state officials and some ranchers welcomed a plan they said could help put wolves in check more than a decade after they were reintroduced to the region.
"This is something we need," said Allen Jaggi, a Wyoming state representative from Lyman. "We're in a hell of a mess. We're losing elk. We're losing domestic livestock."
Another pending U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service proposal would go much further, allowing public hunting of wolves by stripping them of protection under the Endangered Species Act. With that idea facing a near-certain legal challenge -- which could hang it up in court possibly for years -- federal officials said the big game protection proposal gives states at least an interim measure to deal with problem wolves.
Representatives of environmental groups argued Tuesday for the idea to be dropped. They said it was a thinly veiled tactic to let states kill wolves before their federal protection is lifted.
"This is their way of making it very, very easy to kill wolves while they are still on the endangered list," said Jesse Timberlake with Defenders of Wildlife. "We would be killing something for fulfilling their natural role in ecosystem dynamics."
Timberlake and other critics pointed out that elk populations in Idaho, Montana and Wyoming are generally within the desired range set by state wildlife agencies, with only a few exceptions.
State wildlife officials said while that is true regionwide, individual herds have suffered drastic declines and some have seen newborn calf numbers drop to unsustainable levels.
Rules for killing wolves were last loosened in 2005, when ranchers gained leeway to shoot wolves for harassing or chasing livestock. Before that, wolves could only be shot when caught grasping or biting cows, sheep or other livestock.
In the two years since that change, about 30 wolves have been shot by landowners, said Ed Bangs, who heads the federal wolf recovery effort in the Northern Rockies. That's versus about a dozen killed by landowners from 1994 to 2005.
Through 2006, federal wildlife agents killed an additional 495 wolves, primarily following conflicts with livestock.
But wolves' killing their natural prey has not previously been addressed.
Idaho sought federal permission in 2005 to kill more than 50 wolves preying on elk in the Clearwater National Forest near the Montana border. The state wanted to knock back the area's wolf population by 75 percent. Idaho ultimately shelved the proposal after realizing it did not meet federal law.
The new rule would legitimize such plans. States would first have to prove wolves were a "major cause" of game declines. Measures of decline could include changes in herd movements or feeding patterns, declining survival rates, and fewer calves per adult animal.
The states would be barred from reducing wolf numbers below 200 animals or 20 breeding pairs in any one state. That's twice the 100 wolves and 10 breeding pairs considered the benchmark for a recovered population.
Steve Nadeau, manager of the Idaho Department of Fish and Game's large carnivore program, said his agency prefers that wolves be removed from the endangered species list, which would give the state full control.
Absent that, Nadeau said Idaho needs some outlet for harvesting wolves. With a reproduction rate topping 30 percent annually, wolf numbers can be reduced by a third every year without a population drop, according to federal studies.
"If there's any species that can handle management, wolves can," Nadeau said.
Wyoming officials said four elk herds in the northwest corner of the state have suffered due to wolves. Wyoming Game and Fish Department spokesman Eric Keszler said there was no timeline for dealing with those problems if the federal proposal is approved.
In Montana, where two elk herds near Yellowstone have been hit hard, state officials say they are unlikely to use the new rule to protect big game, opting instead to limit harvests by hunters. Wolf coordinator Carolyn Sime with the Montana Department of Fish, Wildlife and Parks added that it is largely a moot point since there were only 21 breeding pairs in the state at the end of 2006.
Additional hearings on the federal proposal are planned for today in Helena, Mont., and Thursday in Boise, Idaho.
It could be put in place by the end of the year, said spokeswoman Sharon Rose.
By MATTHEW BROWN
Associated Press writer Wednesday, July 18, 2007
CODY -- Shielded by law from hunters, gray wolf populations boomed in the Northern Rockies over the last decade at the expense of some big game herds that represent a sure meal for the resurgent carnivores. But the balance of power in the region's forests could soon tilt against those 1,300 wolves.
Federal officials are seeking to give Idaho, Montana and Wyoming wider latitude to kill wolves that prey on big game species or threaten domestic animals. As public hearings on the proposal began Wednesday, state officials and some ranchers welcomed a plan they said could help put wolves in check more than a decade after they were reintroduced to the region.
"This is something we need," said Allen Jaggi, a Wyoming state representative from Lyman. "We're in a hell of a mess. We're losing elk. We're losing domestic livestock."
Another pending U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service proposal would go much further, allowing public hunting of wolves by stripping them of protection under the Endangered Species Act. With that idea facing a near-certain legal challenge -- which could hang it up in court possibly for years -- federal officials said the big game protection proposal gives states at least an interim measure to deal with problem wolves.
Representatives of environmental groups argued Tuesday for the idea to be dropped. They said it was a thinly veiled tactic to let states kill wolves before their federal protection is lifted.
"This is their way of making it very, very easy to kill wolves while they are still on the endangered list," said Jesse Timberlake with Defenders of Wildlife. "We would be killing something for fulfilling their natural role in ecosystem dynamics."
Timberlake and other critics pointed out that elk populations in Idaho, Montana and Wyoming are generally within the desired range set by state wildlife agencies, with only a few exceptions.
State wildlife officials said while that is true regionwide, individual herds have suffered drastic declines and some have seen newborn calf numbers drop to unsustainable levels.
Rules for killing wolves were last loosened in 2005, when ranchers gained leeway to shoot wolves for harassing or chasing livestock. Before that, wolves could only be shot when caught grasping or biting cows, sheep or other livestock.
In the two years since that change, about 30 wolves have been shot by landowners, said Ed Bangs, who heads the federal wolf recovery effort in the Northern Rockies. That's versus about a dozen killed by landowners from 1994 to 2005.
Through 2006, federal wildlife agents killed an additional 495 wolves, primarily following conflicts with livestock.
But wolves' killing their natural prey has not previously been addressed.
Idaho sought federal permission in 2005 to kill more than 50 wolves preying on elk in the Clearwater National Forest near the Montana border. The state wanted to knock back the area's wolf population by 75 percent. Idaho ultimately shelved the proposal after realizing it did not meet federal law.
The new rule would legitimize such plans. States would first have to prove wolves were a "major cause" of game declines. Measures of decline could include changes in herd movements or feeding patterns, declining survival rates, and fewer calves per adult animal.
The states would be barred from reducing wolf numbers below 200 animals or 20 breeding pairs in any one state. That's twice the 100 wolves and 10 breeding pairs considered the benchmark for a recovered population.
Steve Nadeau, manager of the Idaho Department of Fish and Game's large carnivore program, said his agency prefers that wolves be removed from the endangered species list, which would give the state full control.
Absent that, Nadeau said Idaho needs some outlet for harvesting wolves. With a reproduction rate topping 30 percent annually, wolf numbers can be reduced by a third every year without a population drop, according to federal studies.
"If there's any species that can handle management, wolves can," Nadeau said.
Wyoming officials said four elk herds in the northwest corner of the state have suffered due to wolves. Wyoming Game and Fish Department spokesman Eric Keszler said there was no timeline for dealing with those problems if the federal proposal is approved.
In Montana, where two elk herds near Yellowstone have been hit hard, state officials say they are unlikely to use the new rule to protect big game, opting instead to limit harvests by hunters. Wolf coordinator Carolyn Sime with the Montana Department of Fish, Wildlife and Parks added that it is largely a moot point since there were only 21 breeding pairs in the state at the end of 2006.
Additional hearings on the federal proposal are planned for today in Helena, Mont., and Thursday in Boise, Idaho.
It could be put in place by the end of the year, said spokeswoman Sharon Rose.
