F&G Protects Wolves, Rattlesnakes
by George Dovel
For many years it has been illegal for hunters in Idaho to shoot at any wild game species from a mechanically powered vehicle, aircraft or boat, or capture or kill big game animals with pitfalls, traps or snares. The prohibited methods that apply collectively to all game animals, birds and fur-bearing species are listed in Idaho Code Section 36-1101.
The additional prohibited methods of take that apply only to big game animals are listed in Idaho Administrative Code under IDAPA 13.01.08.05. These include "any net, snare, trap, chemical, deadfall or device other than legal firearm, archery or muzzleloader equipment."
From 1945-1971 extended either-sex deer and elk seasons and multiple deer harvests in an increasing number of units ultimately resulted in record low populations of both species and a sharp drop in big game tag sales. To offset this loss of income, IDFG, the Commission and their support groups asked the Idaho Legislature to approve adding mountain lions to the list of big game species and charging residents $10 and nonresidents $135 for the privilege of hunting a lion.
Outdoorsmen pointed out that this would result in an excessive increase in lions since trapping would be prohibited and skilled lion hunters would only be allowed to
kill one lion per year. But the two year IDFG campaign was successful and the large predators were given big game status in March 1971.
With reproductive rates comparable to deer, it took a few years for the lions to increase but Idaho now has record high lion populations and harvests, with severely declining mule deer and elk populations. Because the mountain lion has big game status, the Commission hears demands every year for even higher lion populations from an organized hound hunter group that admittedly cares nothing about the impact on declining deer and elk herds.
This group ignores the necessity to balance predators with their prey species, insisting that no trapping, snaring or other effective methods that violate "fair chase" be used to control these predators because they are now called "big game" animals. The $50 bounty that encouraged professional lion hunters and trappers to effectively control lions and restore bountiful deer and elk populations is history.
For several decades Alaska‟s wolf bounty, and salaries collected by professional trappers and wolf hunters, allowed that state to maintain world class hunting for moose, caribou and dall sheep. But since wildlife biologists convinced the Game Board to drop the bounty and make the
wolf a big game animal/fur-bearer, estimated wolf populations have tripled and sport hunting for the three big game species has been severely curtailed.
Unlike the mountain lion, which averages only 2.6 surviving kittens every two years, the wolf‟s reproductive potential allows it to multiply at a rate of up to 34% per year where populations are hunted. North America‟s noted wolf authority, David Mech, recently stated that wolf hunting alone will not stabilize wolf populations, which will continue to expand until primary and alternate prey species are depleted.
Conscientious wildlife biologists in Canada and Alaska have recorded the decimation of moose and wild sheep populations and entire caribou herds numbering more than 100,000 animals by wolf packs where sport hunting was the only means of regulating wolf numbers.
I.C.Section 36-104 (b) 2 requires the Idaho F&G Commission to hold hearings to determine whether or not any wildlife species may be taken without depleting it. If it finds that an open season may be declared without endangering the supply of any species, it shall make a temporary rule in respect to when, under what circumstances, in which localities, by what means, what sex, and in what amounts the wildlife may be taken.
If the Commission finds that a normally unprotected predatory species such as coyotes are in such short supply that the take must be controlled, this Code Section allows it to set a season with bag limits and methods of take, including trapping and snaring. However it can no longer allow mountain lions to be trapped or snared without going through a process of altering their big game classification by exception or reclassification.
Armed with all of this information, the Senators who wrote the Idaho Wolf Plan included the following: "The designation of the wolf as a big game species, furbearer or special classification of predator that provides for controlled take provides legal authorization for Idaho Department of Fish and Game to manage the species."
USFWS officials approved the special predator classification "as long as it is a managed predator with set seasons and take" when the plan was written. Inclusion of the predator classification is the reason the wolf plan was approved by a majority of both houses of the Idaho Legislature, because it was consistent with their intent that the wolves be removed from Idaho, or carefully limited to the federally mandated minimum if they are not removed.
The Office of Species Conservation followed up on that language recently and the Idaho Plan was again approved by USFWS for delisting. It appeared that delisting would soon allow Idaho to cut the already excessive number of wolves in half but one thing was overlooked: the private goal of IDFG biologists to create and maintain a large population of wolves which may not be controlled as other predators are.
When the Draft Wolf EIS was written in 1993, IDFG Wolf Biologists justified wolf introduction by providing prey population estimates that were 600% higher than actually existed. When the Legislature learned of this misrepresentation, it amended I.C. Sec.36-715, specifically forbidding IDFG from expending funds or entering into a cooperative agreement with any agency, department or entity of the United States government concerning wolves unless expressly authorized by state statute.
Yet on September 27, 1994, while a USFWS public hearing was being held in Boise to determine whether or not Canadian wolves should be relocated in Idaho, IDFG Director Jerry Conley and Wildlife Bureau Chief Tom Reinecker quietly issued USFWS a special permit allowing the wolves to be released in Idaho. The permit was accompanied by a letter from Conley endorsing the strict federal wolf plan and agreeing to work with the federal wolf team to introduce Canadian wolves into Idaho, including providing IDFG staff support.
Shortly before the first wolves were released in Idaho, IDFG Wolf Biologist Jon Rachael wrote a Wolf Position Statement, which included the following:
"The IDFG supports wolf recovery in Idaho, believing that wolf recovery is compatible with all other natural resource interests in the state and that it will not have a negative impact on Idaho‟s economy. After delisting, the IDFG will probably manage wolves as game animals similar to lions and black bears."
The foregoing history and information may help the reader to better understand events that occurred during the March 24-26, 2004 Commission hearing and meeting concerning IDFG wolf management.
The published meeting agenda did not include any language indicating that wolves would be discussed so neither hunters nor the general public provided wolf input during the Wednesday evening hearing. However the Idaho Outfitters and Guides Association requested that the wolf be classified as either a fur-bearer or special predator, allowing it to be trapped or snared.
The following afternoon, one of the authors of the Idaho Wolf Plan, Senator Skip Brandt, arrived to discuss the reasons for designating the wolf as a special predator. Commission Chairman Nancy Hadley acknowledged him and other legislators present, but did not invite his input.
Instead, Director Huffaker told the Commissioners they already had the authority to allow trapping and snaring of a big game animal and the other classifications were unnecessary. Commissioner John Burns raised the issue of "special predator" designation but Huffaker responded, "It isn‟t necessary – we intend to manage the wolf as a big game animal. It‟s what people are expecting and that‟s my recommendation."
Without further discussion the Commissioners voted unanimously to reclassify the wolf as a big game animal. The Legislators got up and left the room.
Commissioner Cameron Wheeler followed them out into the hall and explained what appeared to be a prearranged vote by insisting the Commission must get control of wolves immediately and stop the damage they are causing. I pointed out that once the wolves achieve big game status there is an existing prohibition against the use of traps and snares, hunting with airplanes or vehicles, and all other effective means of control.
Commissioner Wheeler responded that USFWS would never accept Idaho‟s special predator classification because they had rejected the Wyoming Wolf Plan. However there is a significant difference between the Wyoming plan, which allows all wolves seen outside Yellowstone and certain federal wilderness areas to be shot on sight, and Idaho‟s plan which provides for regulated take statewide.
Wheeler returned to the meeting and asked for clarification and IDFG attorney (DAG) Dallas Burkhalter simply read aloud a selected portion from the Idaho Code. Burkhalter failed to explain the difficulty that will probably be encountered in getting a temporary rule approved to overturn half a century of fair chase regulations.
Was Wolf Reclassification Legal?
Idaho law appears to prohibit the Commission from classifying or reclassifying any predatory animal as follows:
"I.C. Sec. 36-201. Fish and game commission authorized to classify wildlife. With the exception of predatory animals, the Idaho fish and game commission is hereby authorized to define by classification or reclassification all wildlife in the state." (emphasis added).
At one time the wolf was included in a partial list of predatory wildlife. The list contained 8 species then, including the starling, but lynx, bobcat and wolf were later removed. Since the wolf was never reclassified by the Legislature, it appears to remain a predatory animal unless/until it is reclassified by that body. DAG Burkhalter may disagree with that assessment.
(in my opinion, the track record of IDFG wildlife managers indicates they are so obsessed with the chance to get another exotic species to manage and sell the opportunity to hunt, they are willing to promise something they will not and can not deliver. Despite the myths that have been perpetuated by wolf advocates, no country has ever been able to control wolf populations with regulated sport hunting and trapping alone. – ED)
http://www.idahoforwildlife.com/Website%20articles/George%20Dovel/The%20Outdoorsman%20No%20%202%20April%202004.IDFG%20protects%20wolves,rattlesnakes.pdf
