Let's leave the howling to the
wolves - Sunday, October 12, 2003
SUMMARY: Success breeds confusion over what's
next regarding restoration of wolves.
One of the nation's leading conservation groups, the National Wildlife
Federation, struggled awkwardly this past week to clarify its position
on removing wolves from the endangered species list. Days after a NWF
lawyer hailed progress toward wolf recovery in the West and questioned a
lawsuit filed by other environmental groups to block downgrading the
wolves' protected status in the region, the Washington, D.C.-based
organization denounced proposed changes in wolf protections as premature
and charged the government with failing to live up to responsibilities
imposed by the federal Endangered Species Act.
If NWF's having trouble getting things right,
it's in good company. When it comes to figuring out what comes next
with wolf recovery, almost no one is getting it quite right. The path
toward restoration of a species that had been nearly exterminated from
the lower 48 states leads through uncharted territory, and the route
best taken is debatable. What's more, restoring threatened and
endangered species in recent decades has, in general, been a quixotic
undertaking in this country. We have a lot more experience - and, for
some, perhaps comfort - addressing failures than successes.
Which is what we've got on our hands with wolves - a rousing success.
Healthy, thriving populations of wolves have been restored to Montana,
Idaho and Wyoming. It's happened far faster and with fewer problems
than many people dared hope in 1995, when the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service began transplanting wolves from Canada to Yellowstone National
Park and central Idaho, leapfrogging migratory wolves that had already
begun slowly recolonizing western Montana on their own. With some 800
wolves now scattered over the Northern Rockies, we are witness to
perhaps the greatest wildlife conservation success in nearly a
century. Anyone who's heard a wolf's predawn howl, understands the
important role large predators play in complex ecosystems; or sees the
throngs of tourists drawn to wolf-watching opportunities knows that
wolves aren't the only beneficiaries of this success.
But the question is, what comes next?
The goals for wolf recovery in this region have been met, so the
animal should be removed from the endangered species list. It's time
for the states of Montana, Idaho and Wyoming to assume responsibility
for managing wolves. Wildlife management is fundamentally a state
responsibility in America. Species in danger of extinction are an
exception. Wolves in the Northern Rockies have been restored to
healthy, self-sustaining levels, so they no longer qualify as an
exception. Montana and Idaho have stepped up to the plate with viable
plans for sustaining wolves; Wyoming's plan is a work in progress. The
next phase in this great project is to demonstrate that this species,
having been restored, can be managed well and routinely, exactly the
way these very states manage deer, elk, lions and all sorts of other
wildlife. Significantly delaying the transfer of wolf responsibility
from the federal government to the states - or to maintain protective
measures at levels suited for animals at the very brink of extinction
- serves only to hamstring their management, to make it harder to keep
them in balance with other wildlife and livestock, and to create
potential for problems and conflicts. It would be like taking several
steps backward after a large leap forward. One of the keys to the
success of wolf recovery to date has been keeping conflicts to a
minimum.
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service rightly has begun the process of
reclassifying wolves to reflect the restoration of their population.
It's working with the states to shift responsibility for their
management. But the agency is working with too broad a brush. It's
proposed to reclassify wolves throughout the West, not just Montana,
Idaho and Wyoming. We don't know whether wolves could or should be
restored to other states, but surely that's a separate matter. Current
wolf-recovery efforts were, from the outset, limited to this region.
The agency's approach largely precludes something that at least merits
consideration.
Several environmental groups contend the federal Endangered Species
Act requires wolves and other species to be restored throughout their
historic range, where possible. They've gone to court to block
reclassification of wolves from "endangered" to
"threatened" in the West, arguing the job of restoration
isn't nearly finished. The issue they raise is worth settling, but
their tactic of litigation threatens to block the logical and
necessary change in wolf status in the Northern Rockies, where
recovery goals have been met and surpassed. A lawsuit could drag on
for years. What's more, the public debate, studies and decision-making
that preceded wolf restoration in this region took nearly two decades.
That process has scarcely begun in most other places where wolves
possibly could live. It's a fine thing for conservationists to pursue
their broader, idealistic agenda, but it's a mistake to jeopardize
notable progress in the meantime.
Wolf recovery doesn't have to be an all-or-nothing affair. Ultimate
success - however you want to define it - is more likely to result
from a series of incremental successes. What's worked in the Northern
Rockies can pave the way for other states. Then again, different
approaches may work as well or better elsewhere. We've seen that
reintroduction can work. Perhaps we'll find the natural dispersion of
wolves from a burgeoning population also works to restore wolves to
neighboring states. Or perhaps we'll see another state decide it's
going to sidestep the sometimes rigid confines of the Endangered
Species Act and bring back wolves on its own, without relying on the
federal government. Any effort to expand the distribution of wolves
depends entirely on public support. If people want it to happen, they
can make it happen. In rallying support elsewhere, wolf advocates
would do well to highlight the success achieved in this region, rather
than trying to spin this geographically limited wolf recovery as yet
another conservation failure.
We've successfully restored wolves to the Northern Rockies. Let's
recognize and celebrate that success. And if people want to extend
this success to other areas - go for it. But also recognize that as a
separate, if related undertaking.]
[Non-text portions of this
message have been removed]
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
NOTE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, any copyrighted
material herein is distributed without profit or payment to
those who have
expressed a prior interest in receiving this information
for non-profit
research and educational purposes only. For more information go
to:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml
