Wolf Proposal Will Go to Feds in 30 Days

The Idaho Fish and Game Commission has given Fish and Game officials up to 30 days to revise a proposal to remove up to 43 wolves in two game management units in the Clearwater Region. Meeting in Boise March 1-3, Commissioners agreed unanimously to have biologists incorporate suggestions from peer reviews and public comments "in a timely fashion, no longer than one month," before submitting it to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service for approval. Fish and Game officials have proposed reducing the wolf population in the Lolo elk management zone, which comprises game units 10 and 12, and keeping it low for five years. The object is to give the declining elk herd in these two units a chance to recover. Fish and Game has already cut elk hunting and increased black bear and mountain lion hunting in the Lolo zone. "We can manage all the other things; we can't manage this critter," Clearwater Region Commissioner Alex Irby said. "Until we can, we'll keep losing elk." Fish and Game biologists say wolf predation is a significant contributor to the decline of elk numbers in the Lolo zone, and may be preventing population recovery. The proposal to reduce the wolf population is made under the revised 10(j) rule of the Endangered Species Act, which took effect in February 2005 and allows removal of wolves having an unacceptable effect on elk and deer populations. They had hoped to get started this winter. But officials and commissioners recognized that the project, even if approved by the Fish and Wildlife Service, would not be in time to kill any wolves this year. The proposal was submitted for peer review and for public comment in January and February. Fish and Game received more than 42,000 comments-the vast majority opposed the proposal. Comments not part of a Defenders of Wildlife e-mail campaign stacked up about 2 to 1 against the proposal. Wolf management is undeniably controversial, Wildlife Bureau Chief Jim Unsworth said. Some oppose any removal and other call for removal of all wolves. "I was encouraged about the level of understanding in general about wildlife and nature," Unsworth said. Most comments blamed the problems on habitat, asserted that Fish and Game's population goal is not realistic, and that population modeling was too restrictive. Peer reviews of the proposal noted similar weaknesses, including the point that the effects of habitat conditions are difficult to separate from predation, Unsworth told commissioners. He agreed that population demographic used in the computer model could be improved and that more frequent surveys-at least every other year-would give better data. But Fish and Game has already taken the deterioration of elk habitat in the Lolo zone into account. In 1984 the area boasted about 17,000 elk. The current population goal is for about 7,400 elk in the two units that make up the zone. Though the most recent survey numbers show a small increase in the elk population, the numbers still are far below that goal. Numbers from aerial surveys this winter show just over 5,000 elk in the Lolo zone. "Wolves are going to force us to be better elk managers," Unsworth said. "But being better elk managers comes with a cost." And wolf numbers have met biological recovery goals with about 500 to 600 wolves in 61 documented packs and 36 breeding pairs in Idaho. "Taking 40 wolves out of that population will not be an easy task. É It's tough country," Fish and Game Director Steve Huffaker said. "But taking those animals out of the population will in no way affect wolf recovery." A summary of the public comments is available on the Fish and Game website: http://fishandgame.idaho.gov/cms/wildlife/wolves/wolf_control.cfm.