Legislature’s Wolf Bill Sets Dangerous Precedence
Let’s acknowledge off the bat that wolves are a sensitive topic. People love or hate them. They kill livestock, which puts hardship on individuals. Opinions on management typically wedge like-minded folks into two camps: science-based management through the Commission framework or scorched earth. IWF’s stance is this: manage them as game species. Period. Use tools within the North American Model of Wildlife Conservation, which includes the existing Commission mechanisms, to manage their numbers and impacts on other game species and livestock. In fact, IWF helped draft the language used to open new units to wolf hunting and trapping. Now, let’s move on to the important issue at hand.
The legislature has introduced SB 1211, which aims to increase wolf harvest, but side-steps the Commission’s authority, creates real and serious risk, and likely won’t increase wolf harvest, the bill’s so-called goal.
Why is this an issue you should care about? Giving the legislature a taste of season setting is dangerous and misguided. The 1938 voter initiative specifically took wildlife management from the authority of the legislature expressly to reverse mismanagement by politically motivated interests. The legislature has not since set any seasons for any big game species. Until now.
Why is that a big deal? Aside from violating the near sacred language forward-looking sportsmen so wisely enacted via ballot initiative in 1938, the bill likely conflicts with the state’s wolf delisting agreement with the feds. If that happens the state loses management control of wolves and the feds take over. This is something no one wants. Several organizations expressed these concerns, including IWF. But politics take precedence and counsel is considered opposition in the statehouse.
If we open this door, what is next? This bill went through the legislative process in a week: lightspeed in legislative terms. Only enough time for the lobbyists who drafted the bill to know of its contents. Imagine how swift the legislature will act for political donors or influential individuals who don’t want elk on their property (think of the ongoing elk depredation battles in the Magic Valley), or don’t want any bear near their property in the coveted Weiser zone? There is a very good reason voters in the 1930’s voted by 76% to boot the legislature from wildlife management altogether. Let’s not put Idaho down this path of catering wildlife management to special interests.
The bill is masquerading as a “wildlife bill”, but it was drafted by the Ag industry. Written by industry, for industry, the bill only asks sportsmen to increase payments to wolf control mechanisms without commensurate increases by the bill’s authors. Raiding wildlife dollars to socialize the risk of doing business is an annual tradition in the legislature.
What can you do? If you want more wolves harvested, but see the obvious issue with allowing political interests managing wildlife- email the Governor and ask him to veto the bill and encourage the Ag industry and sportsmen to come together over the summer to find a way to harvest more wolves that does not trip the legal wires of the delisting agreement.