[HOME] [WOLF!]





Judge Downes Decision Threatens
Yellowstone's Wolf Population

by Holly Jaycox DiMaio
Editor, WOLF! Magazine


     Outrage and utter amazement are the primary emotions flowing from Yellowstone these days in the wake of a judge's decision on wolf reintroduction there. Lawsuits filed in 1995 by ranchers and environmentalists were finally decided by a federal judge, the results of which could be the killing of most of the wolves in Yellowstone and Idaho. On December 12 U.S. District Judge William Downes ruled that the reintroduction was illegal, just as reports of the incredible success story have been pouring from the Rockies.

     The lawsuits were filed separately, the American Farm Bureau questioning the reintroduction altogether, and the Audubon Society and Earthjustice (formerly called the Sierra Club Legal Defense Fund) calling for the wolves not to receive "experimental-nonessential" status. The American Farm Bureau represented ranchers who were afraid of the wolves being introduced and wreaking havoc on their livestock. The environmentalists were not happy with wolves being released without full protection under the Endangered Species Act. With the experimental nonessential designation, wolves caught attacking livestock on private property can be killed by ranchers, and wolves found to have been involved in depredation could be killed by government agents. The environmentalists worried that not only could these reintroduced wolves be killed, but the existing wolves, recolonizing Montana and Idaho from Canada, could also be killed.

     Three years later, with more than 150 wolves on the ground, Judge Downes joined the lawsuits together and ruled that indeed, under the ESA, animals cannot be reintroduced at the expense of existing populations, so this reintroduction is therefore illegal, and the wolves must go. Not just the 68 reintroduced wolves, but also their progeny, in the Yellowstone ecosystem and in Idaho. This would of course be almost impossible, especially since many wolves are not collared. And since there is no facility able to take large numbers of wolves in, the wolves would just have to be killed.

     As he released this decision, he also stayed it, preventing any action being taken, as he was quite sure it would be appealed (a very unusual action for a judge to take). On Dec. 30 Defenders of Wildlife and the National Wildlife Federation appealed the decision in the Tenth Circuit Court in Denver, and so a possibly long and bloody fight will be forthcoming.

     Although the environmental groups responsible for the lawsuit claim to have had only good intentions when filing, others involved in the reintroduction process say that they were warned not to file the lawsuit, and knew full well the risk they were taking. Had this lawsuit been decided quickly, the wolves would never have been released. There is speculation that the judge did the wolves a favor by delaying the decision until the wolves had become established, which would at least give them a chance to survive the litigation.

     The interesting part is the reaction of ranchers to the decision. The Farm Bureau is calling this success, which it is in the sense that the judge decided they were correct in calling the reintroduction illegal. However, the solution to this ruling is to make the wolves have full protection, since the thing that makes it illegal is that the wolves lost protection after reintroduction. If full protection were awarded, no killing of wolves would be allowed, even "problem" wolves who kill livestock. Even if the reintroduced wolves are all removed, the recolonizing population is growing, and these wolves would be free from worries about ranchers or federal agents, regardless of their behavior, until the population got to recovery levels, a process estimated to take 25 years or longer. On the other hand, the reintroduced population is growing so quickly that they would probably be taken off the Endangered Species List in a year or two, freeing the ranchers to "defend" their livestock much more easily, if needed.

     Opinion articles published in newspapers around the country are decrying this decision as shortsighted and lacking common sense. First of all, there was not what could be called a "population" of wolves living in Yellowstone, though individuals have been sighted very rarely in the Yellowstone area. There is a population of wolves living in Montana, and yes, some of them did lose some protection with the reintroduction, which could be considered against the ESA. However, the spirit of the ESA is to recover species in their former habitats, and it cannot be argued that the reintroduction has not done exactly that.



For more on Yellowstone you might want to check out some of the links to other sites which we have found.


[HOME] [WOLF!]
Site managed by TigerwolfImages used with permission of the Artist
Web page © 1998 Monty Sloan
Last revised: January 18, 1998