Idaho leaders might seek changes if Wyoming wolf plan approved.

The Obama administration’s decision to propose delisting wolves in Wyoming will do more than just anger groups like Defenders of Wildlife.

The decision, announced Tuesday, would allow Wyoming to treat wolves like a pest over 90 percent of the state. If successful, the approach will make some leaders in Idaho and Montana consider rewriting their wolf plans to match Wyoming.

It’s a given that Defenders and other environmental groups will go to court to fight the agreement. They will argue that the Wyoming plan will not allow wolves to expand to other suitable habitat in other states.

Wolf and elkThe U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service will protect some wolves from October through February in a small area when the younger wolves are dispersing from the packs. In Idaho and Montana, wolf plans say if wolves move into an area and don’t cause any trouble, they are allowed to live.

In this plan, Wyoming declares them as equals to mosquitoes in most of the state.

That will be attractive to Idaho lawmakers who both want more wolves killed and want to make it easier on ranchers. Unfortunately for them the area that could be considered unsuitable wolf habitat is much smaller in Idaho than it is in Wyoming.

I suspect a court might even challenge the Wyoming designation. For instance, should a national forest with a prey base be considered as unsuitable habitat for wolves?

But the road to delisting in Wyoming will undoubtedly lead to Congress just as it did for wolves in Idaho and Montana. It will face a higher bar though for two reasons: it’s a harder case and because there is no Democrat to carry the fight as Jon Tester did for Montana and Idaho.

But first it must past muster with the Wyoming Legislature and the plan as written is not assured of passage without changes.

Tester Simpson

Why are you not also giving credit to Rep. Simpson for the carrying "the fight" in Congress?

And Tester could just as easily co-sponsor a bill for a reasonable Wyoming plan too- co-sponsored by a Dem and a Republican.

***
The Rock writes,"I suspect a court might even challenge the Wyoming designation."

A court does not challenge a law.
A person challenges a law in court.

You are a terrible writer Barker!

***
If D of W really wanted to save wolf lives, they would transplant Idaho wolves to others states. By taking Idaho wolf #s down it would be less killed to achieve a reasonable minimum population.

But I don't think DoW is interested in ANYTHING other than lining their lawyer paychecks.

Idaho leaders?

Oxymoron.

The comparison in the sentence,

"In this plan, Wyoming declares them as equals to mosquitoes in most of the state." shows the bias of the author.

Bias

Of course I'm bias. Just to be clear I like wolves but think they need to be managed, which includes hunting. The comparison, in terms of management, though is accurate.

Oh, then I misunderstood and I apologize.

Do you really think the Wyomingans think of wolves as on the same level of pests as mosquitoes? I love all animals, including the wolves, but I've always been against the relocation of them, because at the time the smaller Idaho gray wolves were making a quiet come-back of their own. I knew that the introduced wolves would overpopulate eventually and would need to be controlled by hunting, and it makes me sad. They were better left as they were in Canada.

No need

for apologizing. The Idaho wolves and the Canadian wolves were essentially the same since the Idaho wolves had drifted south from Canada. You were ahead of even the top scientists if you predicted they would over populate, which of course is a value judgement itself. Many people think we need more, others thought 15 were too many.

essentially

"Essentially the same"

As I've said before Rock, you and Michael Jordan are "essentially the same".
But I think you can eat more than he can in one sitting and I think he can jump higher than you jump on your best day. I don't need a study, a scientist, or a peer reviewed paper to conclude that either.

***

If you think Canadian wolf is the same as the Rocky Mtn wolf then you must "think" the Alaskan Brown Bear is "essentially the same" as the Rocky Mtn Grizzly bear. Which would you rather have sit on you?

***
For being so "environmental", I'm must conclude you missed your biology class on evolution.

Not all the top biologists agreed

at the time they were doing the research and making the decision. Also, it only takes common sense and the knowledge that wolves propagate at a faster rate than the other predatory animals that they'd soon overtake & pass them in numbers.

The Canadian wolves have better socialism however.

----------

I've just failed miserably trying to be incognito.

Sub-species

Is/was the "Idaho gray wolf" actually a genetic sub-species, or has genetic testing ever been done? Sometimes when something is unwelcome, it becomes a "big" problem. Is it possible, due to isolation, that wolves in Idaho, before "reintroduction", were a coyote-wolf hybrid or something? Or are we just vilifying them into the "big, bad wolf"?

Short answer: No

The wolves in Idaho were/are the same species and subspecies as those which were reintroduced. They were also the same size as the reintroduced wolves. The wolves here average 90 lbs for an adult female and 105 lbs for an adult male.

Long answer - that's wrong

Biologists know the wolves that existed in Montana BEFORE the introduction were the subspecies that roamed the Rocky Mtns- including MT, WY, and Central Idaho. That was a subspecies population.
Agree or Disagree?

The introduction effort said, "These Candadian Wolves are the closest we have in large numbers. Let's move some of them South."

You are Wrong Buffalo. Try to accept it.
Simple Google Wolf subspecies and you find plenty of support for different subspecies in the different geographic regions.

Now there may be a valid argument that the two subspecies would not make a measurable difference but that is a TOTALLY different point.
And Rocky Barker and Michael Jordan are the same species too.

Rocky would not look as good bald with an earring. Honestly.

----------

I've just failed miserably trying to be incognito.

Some help

Some help
http://www.wolfhowl.org/subspecies.php

Read this page and try to refute it.

Why do you need help?

----------

I've just failed miserably trying to be incognito.

At least Patrick Orr gets to write about beer.

----------

I've just failed miserably trying to be incognito.

Actually the name of the

Actually the name of the species of the wolf living in Idaho was The Northern Rocky Mountain Wolf andwas classified as gray wolf subspecies Canis lupus irremotus in 1937 by senior biologist Edward A. Goldman. It is now thought to be extinct. There were never many of them, only a handful. I remember seeing one once on the middle fork of the salmon as a kid. I told people, and they told me it was a coyote. It was bigger than a coyote, and looked different.