An Idaho wolf season that many believed was a certainty was placed at risk over the weekend as three conservation groups requested an emergency injunction to halt wolf hunting from a federal appeals court.
Alliance for the Wild Rockies, Friends of the Clearwater and WildEarth Guardians asked the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of appeals to stop the wolf hunts until an appeals case regarding the congressional budget rider that removed wolves from federal protection can be decided.
James Tutchton, attorney for Alliance for the Wild Rockies, argued that the injunction is absolutely necessary, as a decision on the congressional budget rider that removed wolves from protection in Idaho and Montana could be two years in the making.
"In the meantime, states like Idaho and Montana could shoot the majority of the wolves that live there," he said. "Wolves could be totally wiped out in particular parts of Idaho, which would set recovery back even further."
But the issue is not really about wolves, Tutchton argued, but rather about the "sleazy" way that wolves were removed from protection under the Endangered Species Act.
Rep. Mike Simpson, R-Idaho, and Sen. Jon Tester, D-Montana, attached a rider to a nearly 500-page congressional budget bill that forced the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to re-issue its 2009 Final Rule. The rule stated that wolves in Idaho, Montana and parts of Washington and Oregon were recovered and therefore should be removed from the Endangered Species Act.
The rule had been declared unconstitutional by U.S. District Judge Donald Molloy in August 2010, but the rider overturned that decision in May 2011 when President Barack Obama signed the budget bill. Molloy upheld the rider based on 9th Circuit precedent in July, but clearly stated in his decision that he disagreed with that precedent.
"It's very sleazy, and that's what upset the district court," Tutchton said. "It's just a crummy and an unconstitutional way to settle a public debate."
The conservation groups' appeal is based on challenging the court's precedent, and Tutchton said he felt the groups had a "decent" chance to convince the court to overturn the rider. He argued that this likelihood makes the injunction all the more necessary.
"Idaho could easily shoot 90 percent of the wolves that are currently there before the 9th Circuit could decide the case," Tutchton said. "There will be literally a thousand fewer wolves for us to argue about."
<
But sportsmen say that it would be almost impossible for hunters to have that much of an impact during one season.
"The only way that they could do that is with a very aggressive and coordinated trapping program," said Nate Helm, board member of Idaho Sportsmen for Fish and Wildlife. "I do not believe they could do that with a regular rifle hunting season."
Idaho's wolf hunt does include a trapping season from Nov. 15 to March 31 in some zones. Trapping would not be allowed in the Southern Mountain Region, which includes the Wood River Valley. A report from the Idaho Department of Fish and Game states that the trapping season was "unlikely" to reduce wolves to unsustainable numbers.
Wolves are nocturnal and adapted to hiding in rugged, forested country. Helm said that while hunters may be able to significantly reduce wolf numbers in more open states such as Montana, this possibility is slim to none in Idaho.
"I think it's a lot of hyperventilating," he said. "I'm pretty confident that we're going to have wolves in Idaho."
Garrick Dutcher, program manager for wolf advocacy group Living with Wolves, said he agreed that Tutchton's projection was an exaggeration.
"I think a lot more wolves will be killed than should be killed, but I don't think 90 percent," he said. Still, he noted, no other species has been removed from federal protection only to be managed to such a low level.
Idaho's stated goal is to manage for 150 wolves, approximately 10 percent of the current population estimate of over 1,000—hence Tutchton's estimate. Calls to the Idaho Department of Fish and Game to determine the likelihood of approaching this number were not returned as of press time.
Jack Oyler, state vice-chairman for Idaho Sportsmen for Fish and Wildlife, said wolf advocates including the regional Defenders of Wildlife agreed to that management goal when it was originally set in 2002. Still, he said, the current efforts to fight the goal came as no surprise to him.
"It doesn't matter what kind of a management plan you come to an agreement with, environmental groups never, ever, follow through on agreements," he said. "Their word isn't worth a damn."
Idaho's wolf season is set to begin Aug. 30, placing pressure on the 9th Circuit appeals court to decide on the request for an injunction by then.
Tutchton said Monday that the request was at the very beginning of the process, but that similar requests had been approved, mostly in cases where logging was stopped in forests being considered for protection.
"If you win after you cut down the forest, what have you won?" he said.
"I am sure the governor will argue that wolves grow back. So do trees. The question is not whether they will eventually grow back, but whether you'll be able to enjoy them in the meantime."
Katherine Wutz: kwutz@mtexpress.com
Wolf war
U.S. District Judge Donald Molloy in July upheld a congressional move to delist gray wolves in parts of the West, a decision that is being appealed by several conservation groups. Search "Wolves denied protection—again" on mtexpress.com for the full story on Molloy's decision.
In this file photo, a lone wolf retreats from a feeding site in the northern Wood River Valley. Photo by Willy Cook
