April 15, 2011 in Outdoors, Idaho

Budget rider gives states wolf control

• Print
• Email
• Share

Gray wolves in most of the Northern Rockies will be removed from the endangered species list under a policy rider attached to Congress’ budget bill.

The rider returns wolf management to Idaho and Montana, ending two years of court battles over whether wolf populations are thriving or endangered. And it allows public wolf hunts this fall.

Many environmental groups criticized the budget rider, calling it a political maneuver designed to circumvent the Endangered Species Act. Western members of Congress said the rider was necessary to end a drawn-out legal battle. Wolves have been delisted and relisted, with wolf management shuffling between states and the federal government.

Last weekend, U.S. District Court Judge Donald Molloy of Montana rejected a settlement proposed by environmental groups and the federal government that would have allowed the states of Idaho and Montana to manage their wolf packs but kept federal protections for wolves in other parts of the Northern Rockies.

“Judge Molloy’s decision means wolves will remain on the federally protected list indefinitely without congressional action,” said U.S. Rep. Mike Simpson, R-Idaho, who co-authored the rider.

Bipartisan support came from U.S. Sen. Jon Tester, a Montana Democrat, who called the rider “a win for rural America, for jobs, and for our wildlife – and it’s what’s right for the wolves themselves.” 

Here are answers to some questions about wolves and the rider:

Q.What’s the size of the Northern Rockies wolf population?

A.About 1,600 wolves.

Q.Where will wolves lose endangered species status?

A.In Idaho, Montana, Utah and the eastern third of Washington and Oregon. Wolves will remain federally protected in Wyoming until the state develops a wolf management plan that’s approved by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

Q.Will public wolf hunts resume in Idaho and Montana?

A.Yes, said Simpson. Both states can stage public wolf hunts this fall.

Q.What are the rider’s critics saying?

A.The rider is “a significant blow” to the Endangered Species Act, said Andrew Wetzler of the Natural Resource Defense Council.

“Leaders from both parties are completely undercutting the basic principle of American wildlife conservation: that science should dictate which plants and animals will be protected, not the whims of politicians,” he said.

Q.What is Idaho’s position?

A.Gov. Butch Otter supported the rider’s passage, according to spokesman Jon Hanian.

Delisting the wolves “gives us back one of our most effective management tools – a hunting season,” Hanian said. “We’ve proven that we can responsibly manage these predators.”

Idaho has about 700 wolves. “Our view is that they’ve had a robust recovery,” Hanian said.

Q.How will the rider affect Washington’s wolves?

A.Washington has a much smaller wolf population than Idaho with only two confirmed wolf packs – one in the Methow Valley and one in Pend Oreille County.

Wolves will remain a “state endangered species,” said Madonna Luers, a Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife spokeswoman.

The department is working on wolf management plan to reduce future conflicts as Washington’s wolf population grows.

A public meeting on the draft plan is planned for June in Ellensburg.

Q.Will Washington someday have a public wolf hunt?

A.“The short answer is maybe,” Luers said. “In our state, it’s probably a long way down the road.”

22 comments on this story so far. Add yours!

• 

  TLMule on April 15 at 12:31 a.m.

  The numbers given for wolves are low ball estimates based on known packs. This under-counts the wolves by 20-50% in some areas. People need the truth - these are minimum numbers that do not count disbursers.

• 

  Spokane_Citizen on April 15 at 6:27 a.m.

  You mean ‘dispersers’, don’t you? I would be truly afraid of the big bad wolves if they had developed accounting skills.

• 

  Fisma on April 15 at 6:35 a.m.

  TLMule is spot on. People need to know exactly how the Feds count the number of packs. They define a pack as one with a female who has had a litter of pups that has survived more than 1 year. Given this definition, there are a whole lot of wolf packs not being counted.

  The wolves are devasting certain elk and deer herds in the West. They need to be managed by the states just like they do other game animals.

• 

  Spokane_Citizen on April 15 at 6:51 a.m.

  I’m hearing that the respective game departments are severely undercounting the number of surviving elk and deer herds in the west!

• 

  Ninch on April 15 at 7:07 a.m.

  Funny, that the “environmental groups” deemed the rider to be “political” when states get back their powers to “manage” local wildlife in lieu of variable decisions made by judges.

• 

  johnclarke on April 15 at 7:08 a.m.

  Butch Otter supports it, do you need to know anything else? Why is are people so obsessed with wolves? Are they knocking off herds of prize sheep or something ?

• 

  Orphan on April 15 at 7:11 a.m.

  I have seen the Dubois Wyoming Elk herd go from thousands to a few hundred.

  I only have few questions
  1. How many tags can I get
  2. How many days can I kill Wolves
  3. When do we start
  4. Does anyone have any good Wolf recipies

• 

  Spokane_Citizen on April 15 at 7:30 a.m.

  Yup, the problem is indeed predation….too many hunters licenses issued by state agencies desperate the money, and not restricting harvest to what the herds can sustain. You guys are killing your own enjoyment. You’re killing the seed stock.

• 

  Ninch on April 15 at 7:34 a.m.

  So please support your argument that federal control is better than state wildlife management (wolves, deer, elk, and more).

• 

  Spokane_Citizen on April 15 at 7:37 a.m.

  So please support your argument that state control is better than federal wildlife management (wolves, deer, elk, and more).

• 

  force_vector on April 15 at 7:54 a.m.

  Just because the State sells wolf tags doesn’t mean the tag-to-kill ratio will be 1:1. In fact, it seems as though many hunters found that actually hunting wolves is incredibly difficult.

  “Idaho’s seven-month season ended at dusk Wednesday, with the tally showing hunters bagged 185 wolves, short of the 220-wolf limit set by the state last year.”

  http://missoulian.com/news/local/article_01475a9c-3cf8-11df-a9f6-001cc4c002e0.html

  It seems like some people envision mass-slaughter with hunting allowed. That simply isn’t the case.

• 

  JayNW on April 15 at 9:08 a.m.

  johnclarke- actually yes. There are a lot of news articles reporting the devestation to rangers in Idaho/Montana the last few years. I have a friend whose folks are 3rd generation ranchers in Idaho[- and have lost tens of thousands each year due to loss of cattle.

  I also know of a sheep rancher in Montana who lost about $10k worth of sheep last year. And another person who raises and shows miniture horses, lost every one of them last year in Montana to a wolf attack.

  There have also been wolf attacks near Kellogg, and even wolf sightings within a mile of Coeur D Alene.

  I like the idea of state management, and the option to hunt in small numbers. And as another poster mentioned, they aren’t that easy to find and kill- so I don’t believe they will be erradicated.

• 

  ManleyPointer on April 15 at 9:42 a.m.

  I like a good sheep joke as much as the next guy, but I don’t think that a situation where ranchers are losing significant stock to predators is very funny. I understand how people whose contact with ranchers and wolves and hunting and stock comes from NRDC pamphlets and Sierra Club calendars might be tempted to decry this move from federal to state control, but to those people who are trying to protect their property and their chosen way of life from wolf depredation, it makes a lot of sense. Local problems should be addressed and solved locally, if possible.

• 

  DMORAN on April 15 at 10:17 a.m.

  I grew up in Montana and we were fortunate to pack into the Bob Marshall Wilderness every summer. We would see a LOT of wildlife. It had been about 25 years since I had been in, but got to go in last summer. The only wildlife we saw was one bull moose and a couple elk, (not a couple herds of elk, but a couple of elk) we didn’t see any deer or mountain goats, but at night you could hear the wolves howling. The wolves have been devestating to the other wildlife in the Bob Marshall.

  We have some friends that are ranchers in Montana and the wolves have been hard on their cattle and sheep as well, not to mention even bison. Wolves go after the small calves and are literally destroying other wildlife herds.

  Between the wolves and the “let it burn” policy, the “environmentalists” have done a great job of destroying our wildnerness. We need to stand up and be good stewards of our forests and wildlife

• 

  johnclarke on April 15 at 2:54 p.m.

  Thanks JayNW, I’ll have to read up on the topic when I get some time. Unfortunately all I have been exposed to is the argument. I don’t have the facts.

  Do ranchers get compensated for wolf kills ?

  Dmoran - can you please provide some evidence that backs up wolves destroying wildlife herds ?

• 

  Patanjali on April 15 at 4:01 p.m.

  Putting a rider on a budget bill that has nothing to do with the budget is wrong and should be eliminated as policy within the Congress. If TEA party Republican want to do some significant reforming they should start here.

• 

  hawken on April 15 at 4:59 p.m.

  Environmental groups are not “conservationists.”

  They are “preservationists.”

  “Conservationists” practice the “wise” use of our natural resources, whatever they might be. For example, hunting is a “management tool” to maintain wildlife populations in a healthy balance.

  “Preservationists,” so-called “environmentalists,” prominently far left liberals, would have total, “non-use” of our natural resources.

  What “Preservationists,”don’t understand is that if any population of wildlife is allowed to grow out of control, based upon the ability of the ecosystem to support any given species, that species is subject to a massive, uncontrolled kill, due to disease and overpopulation. Not to mention the damage done to farmers, ranchers and the like.

  It’s called “game management.”

• 

  johnclarke on April 15 at 5:33 p.m.

  Just say no.

• 

  detroitdude on April 15 at 6:41 p.m.

  I’m with Patanjali on this one, don’t put that in as a rider on a budget bill when it has 0 to do with the budget. You want to make it law, write your own bill for it. God knows these people have the money, rhetorical eloquence, and health care to send an email to their secretary to type the verbiage of a bill up for them. Sheesh!

• 

  DMORAN on April 16 at 4:11 p.m.

  Johnclarke - yes, John, just plan a trip into the Wilderness and you can see for yourself. The wildlife is just not there like it used to be. We used to see herds of elk. This time, like I said, we saw 2 elk, 1 moose and tracks of a grizzly bear. We saw no evidence where elk and deer were bedded down, no tracks, nothing! We were in there for a week and I was stunned and greatly saddened by the destruction caused by the wolves and forest fires. Evironmentalist and animal rights people want us to think they’re “protecting” the forests and wildlife. Do they think it’s okay to let fires rip through our forests (through the Let it Burn Policy) and kill all the wildlife in it’s path? It will take years for the forest to look like it once was. What wildlife is trying to come back, the wolves are killing. Again, we need to be good stewards of our land.

  Go to Montana and Idaho and talk with the ranchers. The taxpayers are the ones footing the bill to pay for the calves killed (if the ranchers actually do get paid after months) and then the hoops they make ranchers go through is unbelievable to prove it was a wolf kill.

  There is a great video out called, “The Wolving of America.” You can purchase it at northwestgrassroots.com. It will give you additional information.

• 

  misjustice on April 16 at 7:56 p.m.

  So, wolves get shot for eating livestock; and they get shot for eating wildlife? Geez.

  Who’s afraid of the “big bad wolf”? It appears that almost everyone is. I dunno, the wolves were here first…I don’t think there should be an open season on them, just for being wolves.

• 

  DMORAN on April 17 at 9:31 a.m.

  Misjustice, I would suggest you study the question of “wolves just being wolves,” and hopefully you will understand the harm that they do and why it’s important to not let the wolf population get out of control.

  We’re trying to protect all wildlife as well as a safe food supply (American grown beef and wild meat that some families depend on to feed their families). Wolves do harm to both and they multiply by a larger percentage every year compared to other wildlife.

  The other thing to consider is the disease that wolves can carry and will carry into urban areas, if not kept in check. They travel a good distance each day and can carry tape worms, rabies, distemper, mange, scabies, foot and mouth, diseases carried by ticks, and the list goes on. If they come into some of these walk and bike trails in the night, relieve themselves on the trail, dogs come along during the day, sniff it, walk through it, etc., some of the diseases can be easily spread.

  We know they can take down an elk (by hamstringing them) so they can and will kill domestic pets.

  I hope that helps explain some of the concern many of us have with wolves. There are some pretty harsh consequences that go along with them.