MISSOULA, Mont.–Responding to the latest legal wrangling by environmental groups, the Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation again has entered into federal court an amicus curiae brief supporting wolf population management via state-regulated hunting in Idaho and Montana.

The move means U.S. District Judge Donald Molloy will consider RMEF positions against the environmental groups’ request for summary judgment in a lawsuit seeking to stop the hunts and return gray wolves to the endangered species list.

A summary judgment is a determination made by a court without a full trial.

Molloy is expected to rule early in 2010.

In September, Molloy denied the environmental groups’ request for an emergency injunction. Following a hearing in Missoula, Mont., Molloy ruled that plaintiffs had failed to demonstrate how hunting would cause irreparable harm to wolf populations. RMEF documents, filed shortly before the hearing, were considered in that decision.

The ruling allowed wolf hunting to proceed in Idaho and Montana. By early December, hunters had taken approximately 184 wolves out of an estimated 1,500-plus total population in the northern Rockies–a harvest well below the combined quota.

However, in the September ruling, Molloy also said complaints alleging the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service improperly delisted wolves in Idaho and Montana, but not Wyoming, could have legal merit. Plaintiffs trumpeted the legal opening and filed a motion for summary judgment based on this argument.

“Their attack on hunting proved unpersuasive so now they’re backing up and citing a procedural issue related to the Endangered Species Act. This legal wrangling has drug on well past the point of ridiculousness. This is what happens when you’ve got well-funded plaintiffs who can’t be bothered by on-the-ground facts, logic or common sense. That’s not how conservation works,” said David Allen, RMEF president and CEO.

RMEF entered its new amicus curiae brief by last week’s deadline.

The 37-page document reinforces four main themes:

·        Historic success of modern, hunter-based conservation in North America.

·        Viewpoints of hunters who continue to pay for the big-game resources that made wolf
recovery possible.

·        RMEF-funded research, along with other scientific and anecdotal evidence, showing
that wolf populations are fully recovered and that, where wolves are present with elk,
wolves are having detrimental impacts on elk.

·        State wildlife agencies are best suited to manage wolves alongside other species.

Photo by Tambako the Jaguar

By Amy Linn, 8-06-09 from NewWest Bozeman
An Idaho game commissioner says hunters are so upset about growing wolf populations, they’ll take matters into their own hands and hunt the animals this fall — and break the law if they have to.

Read the full article here.

MISSOULA, Mont. Elk and elk hunting opportunities are plentiful across the U.S. and Canada, and the Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation has just released its annual roundup of hunt forecasts for 27 states and provinces, newly posted here.

Elk herds are in great shape across most of the West, thanks to a mild winter and normal moisture. And, of course, the ongoing habitat stewardship projects supported by our members and volunteers have helped, too, said David Allen, president and CEO of the Elk Foundation.

This summer, RMEF passed the 5.6 million acre mark for elk habitat conserved or enhanced.

Storylines within the Elk Foundation’s 2009 elk hunt forecast include the amazing herd growth following elk restoration efforts in Kentucky, wolf impacts on elk and hunting in Idaho, Montana and Wyoming, massive elk populations in Colorado and the trophy bull reputations of Arizona and Utah.

Here’s a condensed look at forecasts from top states and provinces for total elk populations. To see all the reports in their entirety, including contact information for respective conservation agencies, visit http://www.rmef.org/. For even more hunting including sidebars, see the Sept. /Oct. 2009 edition of the RMEF member magazine, Bugle.

Read more…

Photo by Onwuma

By TRACY ELLIG MSU News Service

Wolves have caused elk in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem to change their behavior and foraging habits so much so that herds are having fewer calves, mainly due to changes in their nutrition, according to Montana State University researchers.
During winter, nearly all elk in the Greater Yellowstone region are losing weight, said Scott Creel, ecology professor at MSU and lead author on a study published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences this week.

“Essentially, they are slowly starving,” Creel said. “Despite grazing and browsing during the winter, elk suffer a net loss of weight. If winter continued, they would all die, because dormant plants provide limited protein and energy, and snow makes it more difficult to graze efficiently.”

With the presence of wolves, elk browse more – eating woody shrubs or low tree branches in forested areas where they are safer – as opposed to grazing on grass in open meadows where they are more visible, and therefore more vulnerable to wolves.

Browsing provides good-quality food, but the change in foraging habits results in elk taking in 27 percent less food than their counterparts that live without wolves.

“Elk regularly hunted by wolves are essentially starving faster than those not hunted by wolves,” said Creel, who wrote the paper with his former doctoral students John Winnie, Jr., and David Christianson.

The decline in the Greater Yellowstone’s elk population since the reintroduction of wolves in 1995 has been greater than originally predicted.

In the three winters prior to wolf reintroduction, elk on Yellowstone’s northern range numbered roughly between 17,000 and 19,000. In the three winters prior to 2008, annual elk counts declined to between 6,279 and 6,738.

Obviously, wolves kill elk, and direct predation is responsible for much of the decline in elk numbers, but not all of it. Creel said the decline is also due to low calving rates, or a decline in the birth rate.

Researchers found that elk facing high levels of predation risk had substantially decreased progesterone levels prior to the annual birth pulse. Progesterone is necessary to maintain pregnancy.

But that raised another question: What was responsible for the decreased progesterone?

There were two competing theories: One suggested elk suffered from chronic stress due to the wolves’ presence. In mammals, stress causes the release of cortisol, a hormone that helps free up energy to fight or flee. But too much cortisol from chronic stress can shut down the immune and reproductive systems.

The other theory was that the elk weren’t getting enough to eat because they were always on the run from the wolves and spending more time in the forest, where food is sparse compared to grassy meadows. For wintering elk that are already on the edge of starvation, anything compromising nutrition could also cause the reproductive system to shut down.

The MSU researchers did chemical analysis of 1,200 fecal samples collected over 4 years, as well as urine samples for the study. They did not find the elevated levels of cortisol that would support the chronic stress theory.

However, they did find that those elk living in the presence of wolves had lower levels of progesterone, a hormone necessary to maintain pregnancy, than those elk that didn’t live with wolves.

“The elk are trading reproduction for longevity,” Creel said. “Elk are potentially long-lived, and many prior studies have shown that, in species like this, natural selection favors individuals who do not compromise their own survival for the sake of a single reproductive opportunity.”

If predators commonly affect the reproduction of their prey, it will change the thinking about predator-prey dynamics, and might change how wildlife managers plan for the reintroduction of predators, Creel said.

“This research shows that the total effect of a predator on prey numbers can be larger than one would determine simply by looking at the number that are killed,” he said.

Creel and his current doctoral student Paul Schuette are seeing if the theory holds up with other prey-predator populations, with a study of lions, spotted hyenas and a diverse array of prey animals on a Maasai Community Conservation Area in the South Rift of Kenya.

The study of Montana elk ruled out weather and grizzly bears as the cause of poor calf production.

“It is true that grizzlies prey on elk calves, and grizzly numbers have increased in the region,” Creel said. “However, the increase in total grizzly numbers has mainly been due to geographical expansion, rather than increases in the number of bears in places where they were already well-established at the time of wolf reintroduction.”

The research was funded by the National Science Foundation.

Montana’s Fish, Wildlife & Parks Commission set the state’s first regulated wolf hunting season quota at 75 wolves today leading officials to say the historic decision represents a victory for wildlife conservation in Montana and for the often maligned federal Endangered Species Act.

“Today, we can celebrate the fact that Montana manages elk, deer, bears, mountain lions, ducks, bighorn sheep, and wolves in balance with their habitats, other species, and in balance with the people who live here,” said FWP Director Joe Maurier. “Montanans have worked hard to recover the Rocky Mountain wolf and to integrate wolves into Montana’s wildlife management programs. That’s always been the promise of the Endangered Species Act and we’re pleased to see it fulfilled here in Montana.”

Commissioners approved a harvest quota of 75 wolves across three wolf management units. For northwestern Montana, the commission approved a quota of 41, with a sub quota of two in the North Fork of the Flathead River area; a quota of 22 was approved for western Montana; and a quota of 12 in southwestern Montana.

“Montana’s approach is by definition open, balanced, scientific and cautious,” Maurier said. “The quota of 75 wolves is conservative and respectful because it limits the total number of wolves that can be taken by hunters and it ensures that FWP can carefully monitor the population before, during, and after the hunting season to examine how the population responds.”

Wolf hunting-season dates correspond to Montana’s early back-country big game hunting season, which runs Sept. 15 through Nov. 29; and the big game rifle season set for Oct. 25 through Nov. 29. Hunting licenses will cost $19 for residents and $350 for nonresidents. License sales are set to begin Aug 17.

“The people of Montana have done their part to make sure that wolves have a place to live and we owe Montanans our thanks,” Maurier said. “FWP, too, is well prepared to manage and conserve the wolf as part of Montana’s wildlife stewardship responsibilities.”

Officials caution, however, that the wolf hunting season could be blocked by groups that recently sued the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to prevent wolf delisting. Such legal challenges prevented wolf delisting and a hunting season last year and could affect the sale of wolf hunting licenses this year. FWP intends to once again join the USFWS’s defense of the delisting decision in court at the appropriate time.

The recovery goal for wolves in the northern Rocky Mountains was set at a minimum of 30 breeding pairs—successfully reproducing wolf packs—and a minimum of 300 individual wolves for at least three consecutive years. This goal was achieved in 2002, and the wolf population has increased every year since. The northern Rockies’ “metapopulation” is comprised of wolf populations in Montana, Idaho, and Wyoming. Today, about 1,645 wolves, with about 95 breeding pairs, live in the region, where wolves can travel about freely to join existing packs or form new packs.   This, combined with wolf populations in Canada and Alaska, assures genetic diversity.

In Montana, officials estimate that 497 wolves, in 84 verified packs, and 34 breeding pairs inhabited the state at the end of 2008.   

Delisting allows Montana to manage wolves in a manner similar to how bears, mountain lions and other wildlife species are managed, guided completely by state management plans and laws.  

To learn more about Montana’s wolf population, visit FWP online at fwp.mt.gov. Click “Montana Wolves“.

MISSOULA, Mont. Science-based field research, funded in part by the Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation, is yielding solid data on why gray wolves in Idaho, Montana and Wyoming should be managed by state wildlife agencies. said David Allen, RMEF president and CEO. Tying up this issue in courts defies a proven conservation system that is extremely successful at balancing predatory species within biological and social tolerances. Elk Foundation has long funded scientific research on topics surrounding elk and habitat. Universities and state and federal agencies apply for RMEF research grants and conduct the projects. Researchers present results to peers at professional conferences. New understanding leads to better management strategies for all wildlife in elk country.but still federally protected population of keystone predators is complicating and hindering elk management, as well as conservation itself.ld be counted in the U.S. Leadership, stewardship and funding from hunters restored elk to their current population of more than 1 million. It’s this resource that made wolf recovery possible. Yet hunters and state conservation agencies are being victimized by continuous delays in wolf management.

Wolves have been on and off endangered species lists in recent months. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has repeatedly announced at least partial delisting and state-based management via regulated wolf hunting. But, each time, anti-hunting groups have blocked the effort with lawsuits.

List, delist, and repeat. It’s become an endless cycle driven by those who profit from legal uncertainty over gray wolves,

The

Here’s a sample of findings, from many different research projects, that support the Elk Foundation’s position that wolves should be managed this fall via state-regulated hunting.

1. In the northern Rockies, original wolf recovery goals for population size and breeding pair estimates are now exceeded by over 500 percent and 333 percent, respectively.

2. Wolf populations in Montana are increasing 10-34 percent annually.

3. Wolves are the top predator on adult elk, especially bulls. Bears take more calves, but at least black bears can be scientifically managed via hunting.

4. Cow-calf ratios are commonly lower in areas with both bears and wolves.

5. Between November and April, wolf packs in Montana kill 7-23 elk per wolf.

6. Since 2000, elk numbers across non-wolf western states have held relatively stable, while elk populations across Idaho, Montana and Wyoming have dropped a combined 4.2 percent. In many local areas, elk reductions have been dramatic and significant. Wolves are a factor, affecting not only elk numbers, but also their distribution, movement and behavior.

7. Elk hunting adds nearly $1 billion per year to the U.S. economy.

8. Hunter opportunity is being reduced to counter declining elk populations in Idaho.

9. A fully restored

10. In 1907, only 41,000 elk cou

Allen encouraged Wyoming and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to work together on a mutually agreeable wolf management plan. This would remove one of the obstacles that conservationists can actually control, enabling regulated wolf hunting alongside Idaho and Montana, he said.

SCI is closely reviewing two separate cases filed in two different courts on June 2, 2009 to challenge the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s rule to delist the wolves of the Northern Rocky Mountains, with the exception of the wolves of Wyoming.  In federal district court in Montana, Defenders of Wildlife and 12 other wolf and environmental groups filed a suit challenging the legality of the delisting of Idaho and Montana’s wolves.

Read the full article here.

The federal rule that would remove gray wolves in Idaho from the endangered species list was published in the Federal Register Thursday, April 2.

The delisting of the northern Rocky Mountain gray wolf population becomes effective May 4, which is 30 days after the publication of the final rule.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s delisting rule affects wolves in Idaho, Montana parts of Washington, Oregon and Utah. Wolves in Wyoming would remain on the endangered species list.

When delisting becomes official, Idaho would again take over managing wolves under state law adopted in 2008 and under a wolf population management plan also adopted last year.

“We have to move on and manage them similar to other big game animals,” Fish and Game Director Cal Groen said. “This is good news for wolves, elk, rural communities and hunters. I believe this action will help defuse the animosity and anger associated with wolves when we can manage wolves in concert with our other big game species.”

A YouTube video is linked to the Fish and Game wolf management page outlining how the agency will manage wolves. The video link is in the upper right hand corner of the wolf page at: http://fishandgame.idaho.gov/cms/wildlife/wolves/.

Fish and Game would apply the same professional wildlife management practices to wolves as it has applied to all big game species, which all have recovered from low populations during the early 1900s, he said. The Idaho Fish and Game Commission in March set wolf hunting seasons, contingent on delisting, for the fall 2009.

Seasons will be from September 1 through March 31 in the Lolo and Sawtooth wolf management zones; from September 15 through December 31 in the Selway and Middle Fork zones; and elsewhere from October 1 through December 31.

Commissioners would set harvest quotas in August, pending delisting taking effect.

Wolves were all but extirpated in Idaho by the 1930s. They were declared endangered in 1974, and a federal recovery effort brought 35 wolves to central Idaho in 1995 and 1996. Wolf population numbers have grown steadily since then.

The Fish and U.S. Wildlife Service delisting documents and other documents are available at http://fishandgame.idaho.gov/cms/wildlife/wolves/.

After they were nearly wiped out in the lower 48 states, wolves in Idaho were declared endangered in 1974 under the Endangered Species Act. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s 1987 recovery plan for wolves in the Northern Rocky Mountains included reintroducing them in central Idaho in 1995 and 1996.

Since then, Idaho has been involved in wolf management as directed by the Legislature, which in 2002, adopted the Idaho Wolf Conservation and Management Plan. Under the plan Idaho Fish and Game would be responsible for wolf management following delisting.

In February 2005, the Fish and Wildlife Service revised the rules that govern the experimental non-essential population of reintroduced wolves in Idaho south of Interstate 90. The change eased wolf management rules and gave Idaho a greater role in wolf management.

In January 2006, an agreement between Idaho and the U.S. Department of Interior designated the state as an agent for day-to-day wolf management for the Fish and Wildlife Service.

When wolves are removed from the endangered species list, Idaho Fish and Game will take over management under the state’s 2002 wolf management plan and the 2008 Wolf Population Management Plan. Wolves would be managed as big game animals, similar to black bears and mountain lions. Hunting seasons would be set by the Idaho Fish and Game Commission.

Idaho is Ready and Able to Manage Wolves

Read the full article here.

The federal government’s second attempt at removing endangered species protection for the gray wolf in the Northern Rockies will be published today, with environmental groups already promising a legal challenge.

“The science on this is clear,” said Ed Bangs of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service in Helena. “Wolves are recovered.”

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service announced its latest delisting plan late last year, but the official decision will be published in the Federal Register today, which sets in motion removal of federal protections in Montana and Idaho.

Wolves will be delisted May 4, Bangs said.

For all practical purposes, Montana Fish, Wildlife & Parks already is managing wolves here, but the transfer of control will allow hunting seasons and more liberal defense-of-property rules.

“We’re not hostile to the notion of hunting,” said Louisa Willcox, director of the Natural Resources Defense Council in Livingston. “We’re concerned about the overall, cumulative kill level.”

Idaho’s hunting season is particularly troubling, she said.

The organization is one of 12 conservation groups that announced plans Wednesday to file a lawsuit in 60 days to block the delisting plans.

Montana, Wyoming and Idaho have 1,600 wolves and 95 breeding pairs. Willcox contends the population needs to be 2,000 to 3,000 to guarantee recovery. “We’re close,” she said.

Under the new plan, federal protection would remain in place in Wyoming, where state law defines wolves as a predatory animal that can be shot without cause in 88 percent of the state. Wyoming wolves were part of the first delisting plan, but Bangs said its management plan would allow too many wolves to be killed.

The state of Wyoming told the Associated Press it’s planning to sue the federal government for leaving wolves in that state on the endangered species list.

Lawsuits were expected and won’t automatically derail delisting, Bangs said.

“I’m hoping, while the court goes through this, they will let states manage wolves,” he said.

Another change in the new plan is it provides more evidence wolf subpopulations are connected, Bangs said.

Wolves were delisted the first time Feb. 28 of last year.

But conservation groups sued, challenging the adequacy of Wyoming’s management and questioning the genetic connectivity between subpopulations. Rather than fight the case in court, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service decided to withdraw its delisting rule and come up with a new plan addressing the concerns.

Federal protections were restored July 18.

In March, U.S. Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar affirmed the agency’s new plan, but 12 conservation groups announced Wednesday their intent to sue again.

The groups are the NRDC, Defenders of Wildlife, Sierra Club, Center for Biological Diversity, the Humane Society of the United States, Jackson Hole Conservation Alliance, Friends of the Clearwater, Alliance for the Wild Rockies, Oregon Wild, Cascadia Wildlands Project, Western Watersheds Project and Wildlands Project.