Hunters say wolves decimating big game

BOISE – Idaho hunters maintain that efforts to reintroduce wolves in the state have reduced the population of big game.

Hunters claim to see fewer elk and are skeptical of evidence that says there is no hard link between more wolves and less game. Many hunters are supporting a growing anti-wolf movement in Idaho that is pressuring state and federal officials to reduce or eliminate wolves.

The Idaho Anti-Wolf Coalition has about 350 members, said Jack Oyler, who helped found the group in 1999. The coalition has been raising money to hire attorneys and lobby the federal government to eliminate a wolf population that has grown to at least 260 animals.

Ron Gillett, chairman of the coalition, announced last week that it had retained attorney John Runft of Boise. Gillett, a Stanley-based outfitter, said nothing less than elimination of wolves can save the state’s big game.

“Every day, these wolves are mutilating our wildlife and threatening the safety of our families and children,” Gillett said.

Gillett said he and other outfitters noticed they saw less big game when wolves were reintroduced. He said federal officials had lied about the impacts and the numbers of wolves.

“For me, this is not just a hunting issue,” Gillett said. “We want well-managed wildlife populations in Idaho for hunting and wildlife enthusiasts. We don’t want wolves.”

But elk numbers have been stable for nearly a decade at about 125,000 in Idaho, according to the Idaho Department of Fish and Game. Hunter success rates are stable as well, with 18,900 elk killed in 2003. That’s 22.2 percent of the 85,100 hunters successful, where the 10-year average is 22.4 percent.

Fish and Game experts say many forces – not just wolves – are contributing to declining big game populations. Biologists say a major factor includes the loss of habitat, as the forests charred in the 1920s and 1930s have matured, reducing available food. Mature forest growth also allows predators to get closer to elk calves.

“There are so many factors affecting elk populations, and wolves are only one of them, and likely not the most important one,” said biologist Steve Nadeau, Fish and Game’s large carnivore coordinator.

Nadeau said Fish and Game has attempted to learn more about the impacts of wolves, especially in places where elk numbers are declining. He hears many complaints from hunters. He said it’s likely the numbers aren’t decreasing – the elk are simply more wary with wolves around. They don’t spend as much time in the open and are more careful about making their presence known, he said.

“The majority of what hunters are seeing are behavioral changes rather than population changes,” Nadeau said.

While Sportsmen for Fish and Wildlife believes wolves are “decimating” the state’s big game populations, and has demanded federal and state actions, the group’s stance leans more toward state management instead of eradicating wolf populations. The group has 15,000 members in Utah, and hopes to attract 10,000 members in Idaho, rallying together the diverse sporting groups into one voice.

“The reality is we’d love to see that lawsuit win and see the federal government be tasked with eliminating wolves from Idaho,” said Nate Helm, the former staffer for Sen. Larry Craig, R-Idaho, who serves as Sportsmen for Fish and Wildlife’s Idaho executive director. “We just don’t see that happening.”

Federal officials have proposed new wolf rules that would allow the state to kill wolves in units where elk numbers are below goals, but Nadeau said more research is needed before the agency can justify killing wolves to help elk.

“We are not going to run off and start shooting wolves just because we can,” Nadeau said.

Once wolves are delisted from federal protection, Fish and Game intends to open a season on them, Nadeau said.

But the coalition will not stop short of removing wolves from the state. If the Idaho Anti-Wolf Coalition loses its case in court, Gillett dauntingly said he expects some supporters to take matters in their own hands.

“If we do not come out the way we expect, I can’t guarantee there won’t be civil disobedience,” Gillett said. “We are not going to lose our wildlife because of some liberal judge.”