Let's craft new plan to manage wolves in Wy
MIKE CLARK - Perspective | Posted: Sunday, August 8, 2010 12:00 am | (2) Comments
A federal judge restored Endangered Species Act protections to wolves in Montana and Idaho last week, ruling that they must be managed with consistency across the Northern Rockies. For some, this is a great disappointment; for others it's welcome news.
So where do we go from here?
After working on the ground with state agencies, ranchers, hunters and fellow conservationists for 15 years to help wolves and people coexist, the Greater Yellowstone Coalition believes it's time to resolve the wolf-management issue.
We are confident the following steps would enable a relatively quick return to state management for Northern Rockies wolves:
First, a baseline population for wolves should be established at roughly the current numbers. Each state would manage annually for this baseline with monitoring by the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service to ensure agreed upon levels are maintained -- recognizing that wolf populations in a given state might fluctuate due to disease, elk and deer availability, and predation control.
Such a concept is not new. It has been used successfully for years to manage salmon and migratory waterfowl.
For example, although states establish waterfowl-hunting seasons, they must also adhere to Fish & Wildlife regulations under the Migratory Bird Treaty of 1918. The agency monitors populations while the states administer and regulate fair-chase hunts. Similarly, while states set salmon and steelhead fishing regulations, the Anadromous Fish Conservation Act ensures protection of these migrating species by requiring state and federal coordination.
The same approach can work with wolves. We should not be diverted by arguments that this is a states-rights issue or that managing predators is different. It isn't. These species must be managed cooperatively because they do not recognize political boundaries.
Such laws prevent careless or heavy-handed management by one state -- for example, Wyoming's plan would essentially eliminate wolves everywhere but in national parks and wilderness areas.
The federal government would provide incentives for tolerating wolves and penalties for bad behavior. Endangered Species Act protections would be restored regionally if any one state fails to follow federal laws, assuring coordination and consistency across borders.
Second, a new wolf-management plan must aid ranchers and residents negatively impacted by wolves. We need a fully funded federal/state compensation program that can respond fairly and quickly when people lose livestock or pets. Where wolves overlap in a grazing landscape and chronic predation is high -- yet the location is vital for connectivity and a high priority for wolf conservation -- we can create special management zones. Ranchers and residents would be eligible for special funds and assistance to deal with the complex challenges created by the permanent presence of wolves.
Third, once a better overall framework is established to ensure wolves remain recovered, hunting can then be a viable tool for controlling populations. Regulated, fair-chase hunting will not decimate wolves. Last year, Montana created hunting quotas and limits that Idaho and Wyoming could follow to secure a reasonable and stable population base.
And what of elk populations, which provide the wolves' primary prey base? Wolves undeniably have changed the habits of some elk herds, moving them from traditional territories. Elk are not stupid; when wolves appear they head for safer grounds.
But overall, elk populations continue to grow even in the presence of wolves. A study released last week by Idaho Fish & Game shows wolves have had minimal impacts on elk. This is reassuring news for outfitters, motel and restaurant owners, sporting-goods stores, state game commissions and others who derive significant revenue from elk hunting. It is also reassuring for families who rely on elk as a high-quality source of food.
Wildlife managers in all three states believe they can find solutions to managing elk/wolf interactions. Let's give them a chance to use the North American Wildlife Conservation Model, as it has been successfully applied to migratory waterfowl and anadromous fish, to creatively manage wolves.
Let's muster the political will to move past the polarization and develop a new plan for managing wolves. It's the only way to ensure that the judge has spoken for the final time on this issue.
Mike Clark is the executive director of the Greater Yellowstone Coalition, which has offices in Jackson and Cody.
After working on the ground with state agencies, ranchers, hunters and fellow conservationists for 15 years to help wolves and people coexist, the Greater Yellowstone Coalition believes it's time to resolve the wolf-management issue.
We are confident the following steps would enable a relatively quick return to state management for Northern Rockies wolves:
First, a baseline population for wolves should be established at roughly the current numbers. Each state would manage annually for this baseline with monitoring by the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service to ensure agreed upon levels are maintained -- recognizing that wolf populations in a given state might fluctuate due to disease, elk and deer availability, and predation control.
Such a concept is not new. It has been used successfully for years to manage salmon and migratory waterfowl.
For example, although states establish waterfowl-hunting seasons, they must also adhere to Fish & Wildlife regulations under the Migratory Bird Treaty of 1918. The agency monitors populations while the states administer and regulate fair-chase hunts. Similarly, while states set salmon and steelhead fishing regulations, the Anadromous Fish Conservation Act ensures protection of these migrating species by requiring state and federal coordination.
The same approach can work with wolves. We should not be diverted by arguments that this is a states-rights issue or that managing predators is different. It isn't. These species must be managed cooperatively because they do not recognize political boundaries.
Such laws prevent careless or heavy-handed management by one state -- for example, Wyoming's plan would essentially eliminate wolves everywhere but in national parks and wilderness areas.
The federal government would provide incentives for tolerating wolves and penalties for bad behavior. Endangered Species Act protections would be restored regionally if any one state fails to follow federal laws, assuring coordination and consistency across borders.
Second, a new wolf-management plan must aid ranchers and residents negatively impacted by wolves. We need a fully funded federal/state compensation program that can respond fairly and quickly when people lose livestock or pets. Where wolves overlap in a grazing landscape and chronic predation is high -- yet the location is vital for connectivity and a high priority for wolf conservation -- we can create special management zones. Ranchers and residents would be eligible for special funds and assistance to deal with the complex challenges created by the permanent presence of wolves.
Third, once a better overall framework is established to ensure wolves remain recovered, hunting can then be a viable tool for controlling populations. Regulated, fair-chase hunting will not decimate wolves. Last year, Montana created hunting quotas and limits that Idaho and Wyoming could follow to secure a reasonable and stable population base.
And what of elk populations, which provide the wolves' primary prey base? Wolves undeniably have changed the habits of some elk herds, moving them from traditional territories. Elk are not stupid; when wolves appear they head for safer grounds.
But overall, elk populations continue to grow even in the presence of wolves. A study released last week by Idaho Fish & Game shows wolves have had minimal impacts on elk. This is reassuring news for outfitters, motel and restaurant owners, sporting-goods stores, state game commissions and others who derive significant revenue from elk hunting. It is also reassuring for families who rely on elk as a high-quality source of food.
Wildlife managers in all three states believe they can find solutions to managing elk/wolf interactions. Let's give them a chance to use the North American Wildlife Conservation Model, as it has been successfully applied to migratory waterfowl and anadromous fish, to creatively manage wolves.
Let's muster the political will to move past the polarization and develop a new plan for managing wolves. It's the only way to ensure that the judge has spoken for the final time on this issue.
Mike Clark is the executive director of the Greater Yellowstone Coalition, which has offices in Jackson and Cody.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment