Politics hampers wolf recovery
By Michelle Dunlop
Times-News writer
BOISE -- Ten years after Moonstar Shadow, Chat Chaaht, Akiata and Kelly bounded into the Idaho wilderness, the state's contemptuous position toward wolves remains unchanged.
"We don't want them here. We don't like them," said James Caswell, director of Idaho's Office of Species Conservation. "But ... we're going to manage wolves to the proper level to perpetuate them in the state."
Initially, the Idaho Legislature refused to ratify an acceptable state management plan. The Legislature further forbade the Idaho Department of Fish and Game from participating in wolf recovery or management.
Early on, Ed Bangs, the federal wolf recovery leader for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, began lining up another job -- so confident was he in the states' taking over management of wolves. Instead, it would take seven years before Idaho would devise a state management plan.
While the Legislature's view of the creatures themselves hasn't changed, its attitude toward managing wolves has come a long way. The Endangered Species Act proved too formidable an opponent for the state. Over the years, legislators eventually resolved themselves to the fact that wolves were here to stay. Their original actions, however, shaped the course of wolf recovery in Idaho and still play a role in anti-wolf sentiment among residents today.
"The state essentially bailed," Bangs said. "It was just too hot for the states to handle."
Confusion over wolf reintroduction
Photo courtesy of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Upon its release, a radio-collared gray wolf escapes its metal crate and heads into the wilderness. Wolf reintroduction in Idaho spurred some legislators to ponder withdrawing from the union.
One former Idaho legislator, Laird Noh of Kimberly, believes state legislators and their constituents didn't fully understand what was at stake with wolf reintroduction.
Classifying wolves as a nonessential, experimental population remains a key decision in the whole process of reintroduction, Noh said. A nonessential, experimental population does not receive the full protection of the Endangered Species Act. That classification allowed a flexibility in managing wolves that made dealing with conflicts between wolves and livestock easier, he said.
"It would have only been a few years before wolves in Montana would have come here and enjoyed the full protection of the Endangered Species Act," Noh said.
The reintroduction of wolves under the nonessential classification, Noh said, helped the state of Idaho and its residents avoid the very stringent regulations of the Endangered Species Act at its full force.
At the time, only a few leaders in the Legislature and livestock community understood the implications of the Endangered Species Act, Noh said.
In the beginning, though, it was the Nez Perce Tribe who took the lead role in managing Idaho's new wolves when the Legislature rejected a state management plan.
"We didn't realize the implications," Noh said. "In essence, they kind of stepped into the shoes of the state."
Idaho's management plan
The Office of Species Conservation was established by Idaho Gov. Dirk Kempthorne to coordinate endangered species issues in the state. Kempthorne charged the office with ensuring that a state plan for managing wolves was developed and approved. A task force devised a plan for delisting; the process occurred over a seven-year period, Caswell said.
"The Office of Species Conservation helped shepherd the plan through the Legislature," he said.
By the time the state management plan finally got to the state Legislature, livestock community leaders and political leaders played an important role in getting it passed, Noh said.
"Over time, leadership of the livestock community educated their constituents," he said.
Former Idaho Cattle Association president Dave Nelson concurred. The association encouraged the Legislature to develop a state management plan, he said.
"We always said we could live with wolves if we could manage them," Nelson said. "We don't know if we're pleased or not, but that's the only way we can go."
Wyoming's holdup
Idaho's march toward state management suffered another setback when the state of Wyoming failed to produce a management plan that the Fish and Wildlife Service would approve. The federal agency requires that all three states involved in wolf reintroduction -- Idaho, Montana and Wyoming -- submit acceptable management plans before any of the three can assume management authority. While Montana's and Idaho's plans have been accepted, Wyoming's has not.
Why didn't Wyoming's plan pass?
"It comes down to the issue of take," Caswell said.
Each state must describe how the state will control the indiscriminate killing of wolves once the species is delisted. Under Idaho's plan, wolves will be classified as big game, subject to the same regulations the Idaho Department of Fish and Game imposes for other big game animals such as mountain lions, black bears and elk. Wyoming, however, chose another classification.
"In the case of Wyoming, wolves are classified as predators," Caswell said.
All three states need to maintain at least 15 packs in order to avoid taking cautionary measures to keep wolves from being listed again as endangered species. Wyoming's plan categorizes eight of the 15 packs as big game animals. These packs would mainly exist in wilderness areas and parks. The remaining seven packs could be classified as big game or predators, Caswell said. The Fish and Wildlife Service viewed Wyoming's classification system as conflicting with the Endangered Species Act.
"They're shooting themselves in the foot," Noh said.
Delisting
With Wyoming's state management plan up in the air, removing wolves from the protection of the Endangered Species Act looks a long way out. Even when delisting occurs, Caswell speculated, "the Feds will get sued."
"We know we're going to get sued," he said.
Instead of waiting for delisting to occur, the state of Idaho took action in its own hands. The state has asked the Fish and Wildlife Service to consider an amendment to the Endangered Species Act, the 10(j) proposal, that would allow the Idaho Department of Fish and Game to manage wolves -- with some restrictions -- even though Wyoming's plan has not been approved.
"We need more flexibility," Caswell said. "It won't hurt the population."
Currently, the Fish and Wildlife Service is reviewing the proposed change. Under the proposal, wolves remain a listed species. Some of the policies guiding wolf management would be relaxed in Idaho.
"It's still listed under the Endangered Species Act," Caswell said. "It just gives us more flexibility as far as managing the critter."
By most accounts, the longer it take to delist wolves in Idaho, the more problems that will arise. The delay in delisting means that the state can't utilize the same tools to manage and control wolves that it would have once the species is delisted. This adds to livestock-wolf conflicts.
By waiting so long to delist, "promises appear to have been broken," said Steve Nedeau, who manages big game animals for the Idaho Department of Fish and Game. "Animosity will continue to increase ... the longer it takes to delist."
Idaho's lack of participation
What impact did Idaho's diminished role in wolf recovery play through the last decade?
State involvement would have allowed for more Fish and Game employees to be involved from the beginning, rather than trying to play catch up now with the Fish and Wildlife Service, Caswell said. The state also would have a better relationship with landowners, rather than trying to forge those associations nearly 10 years into the process, Caswell said.
"We would know the problems better," he said. "I am disappointed the state didn't take the management early on. I understand why."
Noh also expressed disappointment in the state's role early on. Noh labeled the state's action as "self-defeating" and "foolish" and said that it "plagues us today in our management."
Unlike many in the state, Nelson agreed with the Idaho Legislature's initial decision not to participate in wolf recovery. The state didn't support wolf reintroduction, so it made sense not to be involved, he said.
"I think the approach was probably right," Nelson said. "I say we got them crammed down our throats."
)
I would also guess I would know full well why you don't let your little girl look at this area down here, her dad had an anger issue. 
