Running Head: IDAHOS BIG PROBLEM: WOLVES

Wolves vs. Hunters in Idaho: Conflict and Management

Kieron Teets
CSS 287 Fall 2014
Abstract
This paper explores eight articles that address the current problem in Idaho that always finds a
way to take center stage: wolves. There has been a growing conflict between wolves and hunters
since wolves were reintroduced in Idaho in the mid-1990s. Because this is such a huge issue,
popular media has been involved in covering the stories pertaining to this conflict. Three of the
articles are from said popular media sources. The other five articles are from peer-reviewed
journals, whose content has been more thoroughly researched than that of the popular media.
However extensive the research may be, all of these sources have the same general view that
wolves have caused the number of hunters to drop significantly, which has caused Fish and

IDAHOS BIG PROBLEM: WOLVES

Game to increase resource and recreation management. The Idaho Legislature has also played a
role in attempting to solve the conflict between hunters and wolves. The end of this paper
explores the statutes that have come into existence in an attempt to resolve this conflict and the
steps that Fish and Game have taken to try to boost hunting and revenues.
Introduction to Wolves in Idaho
Wolves were listed as an endangered species throughout the United States in 1974. In
1995, a federal wolf recovery program was established in which 35 wolves were released into
Idaho and 30 more into Yellowstone National Park (Idaho Species Conservation 2014).
Biologists introduced wolves to the environment in Idaho as part of a federal ecological
experiment (Gershman 2014). The goal was to restore the ecological balance in response to a
reproductive outburst in elk and other like creatures. The wolf population in Idaho and other
states has greatly exceeded the federal recovery goals and objectives, and the United States
removed wolves in Idaho and several other states in the Northwest from the protections of the
Endangered Species Act in 2009 (Gershman 2014).
The introduction of wolves was intended to be positive. However, there have been a
plethora of unintended consequences which have affected ranchers and, more importantly,
hunters. For ranchers, wolves eat their prized livestock that either earns them money or provides
them food. The bigger problem is that the number of hunters is drastically reducing in the areas
that the wolves live and hunt in.

Popular Medias View of the Problem

IDAHOS BIG PROBLEM: WOLVES

Popular media is strongly against wolves. It is under the impression that wolves are
causing two problems: taking over in terms of hunting elk and hurting the state economy. Wolves
are out of control. Wolves were introduced in the 1990s to help restore the ecological balance in
response to a reproductive outburst in elk and other like creatures. They were not introduced to
diminish the elk population completely. The elk population has gone from 11,000-13,000 elk to
under 2,000 since wolves began to inhabit the area (Bulger, J. 2010). Granted, wolves have
done the job they were introduced to do, but it has gotten out of control and is now affecting
more than just the elk populations. Hunters are enraged. The lack of elk is driving away out-ofstate elk hunters, and is therefore negatively affecting Idahos economy (Greshman 2014).
Hunting in Idaho is a big recreational opportunity. People come from all over to hunt big
game like elk and moose. Out-of-state hunters, as well as in-state hunters, spend a lot of money
on hunting licenses to hunt in Idaho as well as tags for the specific animals. Without the animals,
there is no revenue from the hunters, and since the wolf population has sustained itself and
continued to grow, the big game population has plummeted (Bulger, J. 2010). If there is no big
game, there is no hunting, and there is no revenue from said hunting. As a result of the big game
issue, Idaho Fish and Game and the Idaho Legislature have begun allowing hunters to catch and
kill wolves. Fish and Game has also been becoming stricter regarding the sale of hunting tags for
big game, including wolves. From a recreation management standpoint, this increases revenues
because hunters are willing to pay big bucks to kill big game and it starts to solve the problem of
the wolves as hunters are now allowed to kill the wolves that are no longer protected under the
Endangered Species Act (Bulger, J. 2010).
Carter Niemeyer, in his interview with Idaho Public Television (2009), argues on behalf
of the wolves. He argues that yes, the big game population has been reduced, but there is still

IDAHOS BIG PROBLEM: WOLVES

game to be hunted. Niemeyer is an avid hunter and is under the impression that wolves have
become the main excuse for unsuccessful hunters there are just so many other issues involved
in why hunters are not successful (Niemeyer 2009). According to the commonly understood
predator-prey cycle, there will be a point where there wont be enough elk to sustain the wolves,
so the wolf population will die out. That will give the elk population a chance to grow back to its
original numbers, and then hunters will be happy again with the return of big game. It is a cycle,
but hunters are going to have to make due for now and accept that wolves are competing with
them for the same resources. Niemeyer makes the point that wolves are here to stay and that it is
better for everyone in the long run if hunters learn to accept wolves and to continue hunting as
they always have.

Research Journals View of the Problem

Research about wolves brings the conservationist view into perspective. The U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Services 2009 decision to remove the Northern Rocky Mountain population of gray
wolves from the federal list of endangered species was an unwise decision (Bruskotter, J.T.
2010). Hunters were already furious with wolves because wolves were diminishing the elk
populations. Conservationists feared that once wolves protections were removed from the
Endangered Species Act, hunters would arise in full force to exterminate the wolf population,
which ended up being the case (Bruskotter, J. T. 2010). Many hunters have a vendetta against
wolves, and the minute hunting wolves was acceptable, the hunters were ready to go.
The government should have made a better and more thorough decision regarding
delisting wolves. Now, because wolves were delisted, there is more conflict than when wolves

IDAHOS BIG PROBLEM: WOLVES

were still protected by the Endangered Species Act. The Legislature regularly talks about how to
protect the wolf population and the actions it needs to put in place to keep hunters from
annihilating the wolf population in its entirety (Alderman, J. H. 2009).
On that note, the Idaho government has been constantly monitoring and managing the
wolf population since it was introduced in 1995 and 1996. But, since it has become a problem
and hunters have been becoming enraged, the government has taken some specific actions to try
to reduce the conflict and appease the hunters.
The biggest way the conflict is reduced and the hunters are appeased is through hunting
tags. Fish and Game sell tags to hunters in order for hunters to be able to capture and kill big
game, including elk and now wolves. Fish and Game has a specific title in the Idaho Statutes that
addresses game tags for the purpose of hunting, fishing, and trapping. Title 36, Chapter 4,
Section 36-409 goes most into detail about the qualifications, restrictions, and authorizations
pertaining to game tags (Idaho State Legislature 2007). Wolf tags are a new and different process
though. Hunters are only allowed to buy up to five gray wolf tags per calendar year (Idaho
Fish and Game 2014). Along with buying the tags comes an extensive list of rules. Some of the
major rules for hunting wolves are (1) the possessor of the wolf tags must attend a wolf trapper
education class, (2) the hunter must have a valid trapping license, and (3) hunters can only catch
wolves during designated dates specified by Fish and Game. Along with these rules, Fish and
Game also provides tips, precautions, and general knowledge about wolves to hunters when they
buy the tags (Idaho Fish and Game 2014).
Hunters do not have room to complain though. Hunters do just as much damage to big
game populations as wolves do, it is just not as publicized. One contributing factor to the damage

IDAHOS BIG PROBLEM: WOLVES

is found in hunting grounds having become more accessible to hunters over the years. Easier
access means a denser population of hunters, which ultimately means big game populations are
depleted at a faster rate (Gratson, M. W. 2000). Like Niemeyer responded in his interview by
playing devils advocate, wolves have become the main excuse for unsuccessful hunters there
are just so many other issues involved in why hunters are not successful (Niemeyer 2009). This
is one of the other issues. More people means less game for each hunter. Wolves are just an
easy target because they are so publicized in the media as threats to big game populations.
The people who should be allowed to complain the most are ranchers. As a result of the
reintroduction of wolves and the outburst in their reproduction, ranchers [now] fear economic
loss due to the depredation of their livestock (Moore, R. C. 1995). And because legislation only
focuses on the conflict between wolves and hunters, ranchers are receiving little action to save
their livestock and their income. Therefore, ranchers have taken matters into their own hands. If
wolves come onto ranchers private property, ranchers kill each and every one of them (Moore,
R. C. 1995).
The elk receive the least attention and care. Elk are pretty smart creatures. They
understand and respond to changes in climate, land use, and predation risk (Lemke, T. O.
2012). Elk are like most other creatures: If they feel they are at risk, they are going to migrate to
somewhere where the risks are lower. Elk realized there was some sort of threat (wolves) when
their population was dying off, so they chose to migrate. The increased threat didnt help either.
Hunters were one thing, but adding wolves to the mix threw too many predators into the
equation. Migration patterns of elk show that them moving to areas where hunters do not
frequent and where wolves were not introduced (Lemke, T. O 2012). Elk assessed their own
threats and made the instinctive decision to move.

IDAHOS BIG PROBLEM: WOLVES

Conclusion
The goal of introducing wolves was to restore the ecological balance in response to a
reproductive outburst in elk and other like creatures. The wolf population in Idaho and other
states successfully accomplished the goal by greatly exceeding the federal recovery goals and
objectives. Therefore, the United States removed wolves in Idaho and several other states in the
Northwest from the protections of the Endangered Species Act in 2009 (Gershman 2014). This
removal was too immediate a response and should have been thought through a little more not
only for the sake of the wolves, but for the sake of the Idaho Legislature as well. As a result of
their delisting, wolves have been the target of hunters and ranchers. The introduction of wolves
was intended to be positive. However, the unintended consequences affected ranchers and
hunters more than anyone thought. The Idaho Legislature, Fish and Game, and many other
numerous environmental organizations continue to monitor wolves. Eventually, the wolf
population will decrease because there wont be enough elk to sustain the population. But until
then, hunters need to accept the fact that wolves are competing for the same resource. Killing
wolves is not the answer because so many larger problems arise from that versus just co-existing
with the wolves.

IDAHOS BIG PROBLEM: WOLVES

8
References

Alderman, J. H. (2009). Crying Wolf: The Unlawful Delisting of Northern Rocky Mountain Gray
Wolves From Endangered Species Act Protections. Law Journal Library, 50, 1195-1242.
Bruskotter, J. T., Enzler, S. A., Schmidt, R. H., & Toman, E. (2010). Are Gray Wolves
Endangered in the Northern Rocky Mountains? A Role for Social Science in Listing
Determinations. BioScience, 60, 941-948.
Bulger, J. (2010, February 5). Fish and Game Commissioner: Wolves Hurt Elk Numbers. Idaho
State Journal. Retrieved from http://www.idahostatejournal.com/
Gershman, J. (2014, April 8). Idahos Push to Rein in Wolf Population Angers
Conservationalists. Wall Street Journal. Retrieved from http://online.wsj.com/
Gratson, M. W. & Whitman, C. L. (2000). Road Closures and Density and Success of Elk
Hunters in Idaho. Wildlife Society Bulletin, 28, 302-310.
Idaho Fish and Game. (2014). Gray Wolf Hunting and Trapping Seasons and General Rules.
Retrieved from http://fishandgame.idaho.gov/
Idaho Species Conservation. (2014). Wolves. Retrieved from http://species.idaho.gov/
Idaho State Legislature. (2007). Idaho Statutes (Title 36, Chapter 4, Sections 36-409). Retrieved
from http://legislature.idaho.gov/
Lemke, T. O, Proffitt, K. M., & White, P. J. (2012). Changes in Elk Distribution and Group Sizes
After Wolf Restoration. The American Midland Naturalist, 172, 174-187.

IDAHOS BIG PROBLEM: WOLVES

Moore, R. C. (1995). The Pack is Back: The Political, Social, and Ecological Effects of the
Reintroduction of the Gray Wolf to Yellowstone National Park and Central Idaho. Law
Journal Library, 12, 647-686.
Niemeyer, Carter. (2009, October 15). Wolf Hunting [Interview by M. Franklin]. Retrieved from
http://idahoptv.org/