Should wolves really be hunted? The fate of the wolf population in several western U.S. states remains uncertain.
In time for a planned wolf hunting season beginning this month, officials have answered yes. A federal appeals court decided several weeks ago that allowing hunting in Montana and Idaho "would not jeopardize recovery of the iconic animal," according to Reuters.
Conservation and environmental groups had filed a petition with the U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals for an emergency injunction to prevent imminent wolf hunting in Montana and Idaho. Environmentalists were concerned about the “irreparable harm” that will be caused by the recently-begun hunting season, which could mean death for over 1,000 wolves.
The failed petition came after a U.S. district judge “reluctantly” upheld a congressional budget rider in July that allowed for wolf hunting, according to the Associated Press.
The bi-partisan budget rider, which was passed in April, removed federal protection of wolves in Idaho and Montana, along with parts of Utah, Oregon and Washington. “This is the first time since the passage of the Endangered Species Act in 1973 that Congress forcibly removed protections from a plant or animal,” AP reported.
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service maintains that western wolf populations have successfully recovered since near extinction several decades ago. In a press release last month, The U.S. Department of the Interior explained that with more than 1,650 wolves in the Northern Rocky Mountain states, the wolf population “no longer faces a risk of extinction.”
This announcement came with the news that the Department of the Interior and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service had reached a separate agreement with the state of Wyoming to remove federal protection in that state as well. Their agreement, which will allow "unhindered killing of wolves ... in all but the northwest part of [Wyoming]," was recently approved by the state's Game and Fish Commission.
Conservationists remain skeptical about the safety of a population that “is only marginally recovered and still very vulnerable.” The Los Angeles Times reports that the federal judge who upheld the de-listing was “uncomfortable with the backdoor political process” that removed the wolf protections.
Lawmakers said environmental lawsuits had delayed the de-listing, and defended their actions as a pragmatic solution in the interests of residents and ranchers, according to the Los Angeles Times. A sponsor of the budget rider, Senator Jon Tester (D-Montana) explained in April that the de-listing would give more power to the states to manage wildlife.
He said, “We're really not changing the Endangered Species Act. We're taking a recovered species off (the endangered species list) and putting it under state control for management. We'll manage that wildlife species like we manage all wildlife species, and that's on the state level.”
Management of wolf populations in Idaho began August 30 with a hunting season “that sanctions neck snares, foothold traps and luring wolves with electronic calls that imitate other wolves and injured prey."
According to The Economist, the political side of the wolves' de-listing is part of a much older debate. Wolves were nearly extinct in the Northern Rocky Mountain states when the federal government reintroduced them in the mid-1990s. With their numbers now swelling above 1,500, many see them as a “snaggletoothed symbol of big government gone mad.”
But others don't believe the hype about the threat posed by the wolves. Carter Niemeyer, who was in charge of the federal wolf-recovery effort in Idaho for six years, told The Economist, “there is no wolf disaster. The only disaster is the overreacting politicians.” In fact, no wolf has attacked a human since the federal re-introduction in the 1990s, and only 75 out of over two million cattle in Idaho were killed in 2010.
Other states are pursuing different options for dealing with wolves. Oregon Governor John Kitzhaber recently signed the Livestock Compensation and Wolf Co-Existence bill to compensate ranchers who lose livestock. The law, which goes into effect immediately, establishes a $100,000 fund for Oregon ranchers “who use non-lethal methods to deter wolf attacks,” but still lose livestock.
The future hunting of wolves is not limited to western states. Wolves may soon be de-listed from the endangered species list in Minnesota, Wisconsin and other midwest states as well.
Sierra Club executive director and HuffPost blogger Michael Brune wrote, “Wyoming's idea of a wolf-management plan may have more in common with the buffalo massacres of the 19th century than with responsible science.”
