Montana Releases State Wolf Plan
August 22, 2003

Today, Montana finished the delisting "have-to's" by releasing their wolf plan. Idaho and Wyoming have already finished theirs and released it for approval. Montana's plan, as the drafts before have indicated, calls for a benchmark of 15 breeding pairs within the state to determine management options. In other words, more than 15...lethal control will be used frequently and hunting will be offered. Less than 15 pairs, this will be more monitored and supposedly non-lethal control will be preferred and used.

With Montana's release this brings wolves one step closer to delisting, however, there are still many steps that must take place in order for the final rule to be handed down. #1 priority, the USFWS has to scrutinize each state plan and determine if they are sound enough to ensure the wolves' survival in the region. If one plan does not hold up,the whole thing is off. All three plans must pass their tests in order for delisting to proceed.

If the plans are approved....USFWS are concerned (rightfully so) about lawsuits regarding many aspects of any of the state plans. Delisting could still be a long way off, but Montana certainly brought wolves one step closer today. -Renee

Here are three articles regarding the release:

Independent Record
State calls wolf plan remarkable achievement
By EVE BYRON - IR Staff Writer - 08/22/03

Montana's long-awaited plan to manage the gray wolf is being touted as a "remarkable achievement" by state officials, but others say it will resurrect "the very threats that nearly wiped out wolves in the lower 48 states."

Gray wolves in the northern Rocky Mountain currently are protected under the Endangered Species Act, but earlier this year, federal managers downlisted the wolves' status from "endangered" to "threatened." The change is one of the steps involved in delisting wolves.

However, before the wolves can be removed from the Endangered Species lists, state officials in Montana, Idaho and Wyoming must put together and adopt regulations to ensure the wolf population's survival under state management.

An estimated 660 wolves, in about 80 packs, were present in the northern Rockies at the end of 2002. About 180 wolves, in 35 packs, are in Montana including a pack in Boulder and in Avon.

Between 1995 and 2002, authorities confirmed roughly 100 cattle, 220 sheep, 21 dogs and nine llamas were lost to wolf depredation in Montana. It's expected that stockgrowers also experienced other unconfirmed losses.

Idaho and Wyoming already have completed plans.

Conservationists, ranchers and even federal wildlife managers have raised concerns about Wyoming's plan, which calls for a dual-classification system for the wolves. In some areas, gray wolves would be considered trophy game and subject to regulated hunting. In other parts, they would be classified as predators and could be shot with few restrictions.

With the Montana plan complete, it still could be at least a year before the wolf is delisted due to delays in state planning efforts or litigation. The plans also need to undergo federal review.

Jeff Hagener, director of Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks, said the state's plan tries to meet the ecological needs of wolves and their prey, while taking steps to address wolf-related conflicts.

"It's a good compromise that offers more than some folks would like, but less than what others were hoping for," Hagener said on Thursday. "It allows the wolf to find its place among Montana's native wildlife and gives Montana the latitude to respond to local circumstances.

"The plan is a remarkable achievement and it establishes a new milestone in Montana's wildlife-management history."

But representatives from the national Humane Society, the Animal Protection Institute and the Klamath-Siskiyou Wildlands Center said the proposal to delist the species is premature "since wolves have not been fully restored and threats to the wolf's survival remain."

The groups claim that the FWP's recommendations for management are "inhumane, unnecessary, and not based on sound science."

"The Montana plan continues the war on wolves," said Brian Vincent, API program coordinator. "The Department … says it's necessary to deal with ‘problem' wolves. The only problem with wolves is there aren't enough of them."

The final Environmental Impact Statement is 420 pages long, and analyzes five wolf management alternatives. By law, the EIS can't be formally adopted for 15 days after it's released; in this case, Hagener can't sign it before Sept. 6.

Hagener notes that under the recommended plan, wolves would be encouraged to live where the potential for conflict is lowest. The plan would be based on wolf numbers, distribution and public acceptance, similar to how the state manages black bears and mountain lions.

It would set a benchmark of 15 breeding pairs in Montana, then handle management techniques and resolve conflicts based on that benchmark.

The state plan would establish a financial compensation program for wolf-related losses, and landowners would be given assistance to reduce livestock-depredation risks. Ranchers also could protect their livestock if it is attacked by wolves.

In addition, a "regulated harvest" of wolves could be allowed.

Joe Fontaine, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's assistant wolf recovery coordinator in Helena, said that at first glance the plan appears to be a good effort.

"But like all of the plans, it will need additional review," Fontaine added.

That assessment isn't shared by all. Some wolf protection proponents dismissed the plan as one that gives "short shrift" to non-lethal alternatives in dealing with human/wolf conflicts, and it gives broad discretion in managing livestock/wolf conflicts.

They say it fails to protect habitat corridors, which provide links for wolf populations among large areas, and they're upset with the potential for sport hunting and trapping of wolves in the future.

"The Montana plan is festooned with enough ribbons and bows to make it appear ‘reasonable,'" Vincent said. "But when you tear off the fancy wrapping and look inside, it opens up a Pandora's box of troubles for wolves."

But others praised Montana at least for using an open process that brought stakeholders together early and throughout the process of developing a plan, which is "clearly, the best of the bunch,'' said Nina Fascione, vice president of species conservation for the Defenders of Wildlife.

However, "I don't see delisting happening at all smoothly,'' she said. ``It will happen eventually but not smoothly.''

Fascione said her group has "grave concerns'' about Wyoming's plan and expected litigation, though she said it was too early to say if her organization would be involved.

Bozeman Daily Chronicle
State completes wolf EIS
By SCOTT McMILLION, Chronicle Staff Writer

Wolves took a step closer on Thursday to the day when they lose federal protection in the Northern Rockies.

However, that day remains well in the future. Although biologists say wolves have made a biological recovery here, the legal and bureaucratic hurdles to removing them from the Endangered Species list ahead loom tall and numerous.

Thursday's step consisted of the Montana Department of Fish, Wildlife and Parks' release of a final environmental impact statement, a document that outlines how the state proposes to manage wolves once delisting comes.

It calls for Montana to maintain approximately 15 wolf packs.

The goal is to manage wolves in ways similar to how black bears and mountain lions are managed.

That would mean increased ability for ranchers to protect their livestock, authority for FWP to kill or move wolves to maintain game herds, and implementation of recreational hunting and trapping of wolves.

Animal rights groups, including the Humane Society of the United States, attacked the plan even before it was officially released Thursday.

"The Montana wolf plan continues the war on wolves," said Brian Vincent, program coordinator for the Animal Protection Institute in California. "(FWP) says it's necessary to deal with 'problem' wolves. The only problem with wolves is there aren't enough of them."

The FWP plan calls for encouraging wolves in places where the "potential for conflict is lowest" while granting less tolerance in places where they make trouble.

It is meant to allow wolves to take up permanent residence, at least in parts of the state.

FWP Director Jeff Hagener touted the plan as "a good compromise that offers more than some folks would like, but less than others were hoping for."

Still, the plan cannot be enacted until delisting comes, and that won't come until the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service gives the nod.

Ed Bangs, FWS wolf recovery team leader, has said that wolves are biologically recovered because Montana, Idaho and Wyoming have all hosted 10 breeding packs for three years in a row. The three states have about 660 wolves now.

However, Bangs has also said federal biologists have big concerns about Wyoming's wolf plan, mostly because it allows wolves to be shot on sight in most of that state after delisting, although it calls for protections in national parks and some wilderness areas.

Joe Fontaine, the federal government's No. 2 wolf specialist in Montana, said Thursday that FWP "did an excellent job in putting together" what he called a "pretty decent plan."

All three state plans will undergo scientific review to see if they will ensure continued survival of wolves, Fontaine said. Unless all three pass federal muster, delisting won't come.

Some environmentalists also have indicated they will sue to halt delisting. Even if they don't win, that could delay things a long time.

Another big hurdle concerns money. FWP calculates it will cost as much as $954,000 a year to manage delisted wolves in Montana.

FWP, along with Wyoming and Idaho, will be asking Congress to appropriate that money, reasoning that wolves are a national resource and their costs should not be shouldered by the states alone.

"Existing financial resources are not adequate to manage wolves in Montana," FWP said.

The 410-page document is available online at www.fwp.state.mt.us. Click on Montana wolf management in the "Hot Topics" box.

Billings Gazette
Montana releases wolf management plan
Associated Press

BILLINGS (AP) — Montana released its plan for managing gray wolves Thursday, but federal wildlife officials said a proposal for taking the wolves off the endangered species list still could be months away.

A decision could be delayed even further if the plans presented by Montana, Idaho and Wyoming need changes to ensure the viability of wolves in the region, the officials said.

Montana’s plan released by the Fish, Wildlife and Parks Department is largely unchanged from a draft issued earlier this year. It centers on maintaining at least 15 breeding pairs of wolves in the state and allows regulated hunts if the wolf population is high enough.

It calls for rigorous monitoring of the animals and allows ranchers to kill gray wolves if they threaten their livestock or guard animals.

Carolyn Sime, Montana’s wolf plan coordinator, said Thursday the plan is a balanced approach that meets the wolves’ "biological needs," while taking into account concerns raised by the public.

Joe Fontaine, assistant wolf recovery coordinator for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service in Helena, said the plan seems to be a "good effort, but like all of the plans, it will need additional review."

Federal wildlife officials have said they’re ready to move toward removing gray wolves from federal protection because the wolves have made a remarkable recovery since first being reintroduced to the region in 1995. But Montana, Idaho and Wyoming all must first come up with plans for managing wolves that ensure the animals continue to thrive.

Roughly 660 wolves roamed the region at the end of last year and officials estimated that 183 wolves were in Montana, including about 16 breeding pairs.

The Fish and Wildlife Service will review the state plans to see if they meet "minimal requirements," said Sharon Rose, a spokeswoman with the agency’s regional office in Denver. If they do, they will undergo scientific "peer" review, a process which may be completed during this fall, she said.

Fontaine said the goal for proposing delisting is next year. But, "we don’t know how everything is going to fall just yet," he said.

If there are problems with one or more of the plans — something, perhaps, that state legislators might need to address — the process could take a while, Rose said.

"I don’t think we’re anticipating problems. We’re hopeful that a lot of kinks are worked out," she said. "But when you bring a new group in to review things, it’s possible they will see things that we didn’t."

Conservationists, ranchers and even federal wildlife managers have raised concerns about Wyoming’s plan, which calls for a dual-classification system for the wolves. In some areas, gray wolves would be considered trophy game and subject to regulated hunting. In other parts, they would be classified as predators and could be shot with few restrictions.

Montana has garnered praise for an open process that brought stakeholders together early and throughout the process of developing a plan, which is "clearly, the best of the bunch," said Nina Fascione, vice president of species conservation for the Defenders of Wildlife.

However, "I don’t see delisting happening at all smoothly," she said. "It will happen eventually but not smoothly."

Fascione said her group has "grave concerns" about Wyoming’s plan and expected litigation, though she said it was too early to say if her organization would be involved.

Brian Vincent, a program coordinator with the Animal Protection Institute, called the three state plans "a collective war on wolves."

"The portrait these plans paint is that wolves are dangerous animals and need to be controlled," he said. "We move into their habitat, have essentially lured them with livestock. We’re logging their habitat, grazing in their habitat."

Under Montana’s plan, regulated hunts would be allowed when the population reaches a level considered "biologically sustainable" and ranchers could kill wolves that threaten their livestock but would need to report this to Fish, Wildlife and Parks, Sime said.

An important next step is coming up with a compensation program, she said. The plan says the state "intends to find or create an entity to administer" such a program.

Wolf monitoring would be done in a way that balances the need for information with cost-effectiveness, she said.

Costs for managing wolves remains a concern for all three states.