WILD BILL

Wolf Delisting, Beware of Overkill

By Bill Schneider, 2-21-07

As almost all of us know (except those living in total media isolation for five years), the federal government plans to remove the wolf from the protection of the Endangered Species Act and turn over management to state wildlife agencies in Idaho and Montana and, perhaps, Wyoming.

Interestingly, nobody really opposes this delisting, but many green groups oppose how it’s being done and, specifically, current plans by state agencies for immediate large reductions in wolf numbers. The result will be, certainly and regrettably, a long drawn out litigation period.

Because of volatility of the emotion-charged situation and the likelihood of a painful backlash spurred on by rapidly increasing wolf numbers, I think both sides of the debate should back off to avoid overkill.

We’re about halfway through the 60-day public comment period for delisting. I know many of us are already “over-wolfed,” I encourage you to get involved, but perhaps not in the way your gut tells you.

If you hate wolves or love wolves, I suggest making the same comments, emphasizing the need to move forward quickly instead of simply opposing or supporting delisting or making pointed comments about the other side of the debate or the evil federal government. Encourage both sides to ease off to allow delisting to actually happen.

So, what does “ease off” mean? Here’s how I see it.

You’ll never get the executive director of a green group to admit this, but wolves are great for business. The Defenders of Wildlife, for example, could easily be re-named the Wolf and Bear Fundraising Foundation. Groups trying to preserve biodiversity, which means saving slugs and liverworts, might have noble goals, but saving the charismatic megafauna is where the money is.

This means the greens have a built-in incentive to keep the wolf delisting issue going as long as possible, but lengthy delays could easily in so much resentment that it becomes counterproductive for the greens. It could bring down the Endangered Species Act, for example, and perhaps reverse the current positive trend in many areas of environmental protection. There’s already a strong and growing perception that “outsiders” imposed the wolf on residents of the New West, but don’t have to live here and “pay the costs.” Any delay in delisting perpetuates this belief, and I don’t want to know how bad it can get. Environmentalist is already the “E word” in many areas of the New West, so let’s not make it worse by prolonging wolf delisting with endless litigation.

Even the greenest of the greens agrees the wolf has been recovered in Idaho, Montana and Wyoming. The problem is, as well as the upcoming focal point of litigation, is the eradicate-them-again mentality sweeping the New West. Instead of severely reducing numbers, we should mange current populations at a higher than the current minimally acceptable level.

This is not thermonuclear physics. It’s akin to negotiating a collective bargaining agreement i.e. there’s always a number in the middle that works. All it takes is for one key person to make a few calls and get a consensus on a workable number that’s scientifically sound.

Take Idaho, for example. The Gem State has at least 650 wolves, and the minimum requirement for delisting is 100 wolves per state. Everybody seems okay with having less than 650 wolves in Idaho, but how do we get there.

Some scientists support the number 100, but I know the greens think 100 is too low and could cause the wolf to become endangered again. And consequently, will head to the courthouse to prove their point.

So, if scientists say 100 is enough, well, I bet they’d also say 200 is enough, right?

So, hello, Fish and Wildlife Service and state wildlife agencies, how hard is this? Make a few calls to the major greens and negotiate. There must be a number that could keep the delisting proposal out of court. This seems so much smarter than everybody sticking to their guns so we can be overrun by wolves while lawyers fight it out.

If greens agree on a number and agencies agree to maintain levels at that higher number, and then, they sue anyway, well, then they will truly deserve their reputation.

Back to the public input. First, please suffer no illusions. The federal government will approve delisting regardless of how many people oppose it. Even 10 million comments opposed to delisting to every one supporting it would not stop delisting. Knowing this, give some consideration to supporting this negotiated approach, so we can all have a victory celebration in 2007.

A series of six public hearings start next week, with the first in Cheyenne (February 27) following by similar meetings in Salt Lake City, Boise, Helena, Pendleton and Spokane. You can get the exact schedule here.

If you want to email, here’s the address: NRMGrayWolffws.gov. If you still use snail mail, here’s the address: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Wolf Delisting, 585 Shepard Way, Helena, MT, 59601.You have until April 9 to get your $0.02 into the official record.

Like this story? Get more! Sign up for our free newsletters.