Christian Science Monitor, June 19, 1995

The wolf was caught in a leghold trap near a Yellowstone National Park boundary in late April. Livestock ranchers who live near the park had set the trap.

It was one of 14 Canadian gray wolves that had been reintroduced to the park in January. After being caught, it was tranquilized, examined, fitted with a radio collar, and released. None of the wolves reintroduced to Yellowstone have been killed.

But the incident illustrates the tensions surrounding the return of wolves to the Greater Yellowstone region. It took 15 years of government studies and litigation before the reintroduction began. And now the courts have been asked to stop it.

A coalition of farm bureau groups filed suit in federal district court in Wyoming in February. Their complaint says reintroduction violates the Endangered Species Act (ESA) because it actually puts wolves already living in the region at risk.

A small population of wolves is believed to live in Montana and Idaho, having migrated south from Canada. Since wolves are protected under the ESA and can’t legally be killed, reintroduction opponents argue the Canadian wolves’ lower “experimental-population” designation puts wild wolves at risk. Under the experimental designation, a wolf can be killed if it’s found preying on livestock.

“It’s a Catch 22,” says Ron Gillett, a rancher near Challis, Idaho, and an organizer of opposition to the reintroduction. “If there are naturally occurring wolves, you can’t legally reintroduce the Canadian wolves without putting the wild ones at risk.”

Reintroduction proponents say it’s a specious argument. “There may be two or three wolves in Idaho and Montana and reintroduction has to be stopped for that?” asks Hank Fischer, the Defenders of Wildlife’s Northern Rockies representative and author of Wolf Wars, a book about the reintroduction effort. “The purpose of the Endangered Species Act is to bring wolves back. Not to use a possible technicality to prevent their recovery.”

Fourteen wolves were introduced into Yellowstone and 15 into central Idaho in January. As of late May, the Yellowstone pack had produced five pups — a sign biologists call very encouraging. One wolf died after eating a poison bait that had been illegally set. Two have been killed after leaving the park and preying on livestock. A third — the one caught in the leghold trap — has also left the park.

The Idaho wolves have been more problematic. Three have been killed; two for livestock predation and one found dead near a road. Seven of the Idaho wolves have left the release area. Five have been recaptured and are being held in pens. The other two are roaming freely.

Despite these setbacks, Ed Bangs, the US Fish and Wildlife Service’s wolf recovery coordinator, says the reintroduction is proceeding as expected. The program’s goal is to establish a wild population of 100 wolves and 10 breeding pairs in each of three regions by 2002.

“Nineteen wolves out of 29 are doing well and the Yellowstone pack has pups,” Mr. Bangs says. “I think the reintroduction is going reasonably well.”

Opposition to the reintroduction has remained strong, particularly in Idaho. In May, the state Legislature passed a resolution asking the federal government to remove the wolves.

“These are Canadian wolves — they’re not from here,” says Mr. Gillett, adding that wolves pose a threat to livestock and big game herds. The Idaho Farm Bureau Federation, which is part of the coalition that sued to stop reintroduction, estimates wolves could cost the state’s sheep ranchers $1 million a year in livestock losses. “The reintroduction is a feel-good program that doesn’t make economic sense.”

Reintroduction supporters say opposition is driven by fear and ignorance, noting that wolf-livestock conflicts in Montana and Canada are relatively rare. The Defenders of Wildlife has paid ranchers for confirmed livestock losses to wolves.

“The opposition is not based on reality,” says Renee Askins, director of The Wolf Fund, an organization whose sole purpose was to help reintroduce wolves to Yellowstone. “It’s based on cultural mythology.”

After the wolves’ first year in Yellowstone, Ms. Askins has disbanded The Wolf Fund, saying it had achieved its goal. But she adds there is still work to be done to ensure the wolves’ recovery.

The outcome of the lawsuit, expected by the end of summer, could determine whether the wolves remain. If the courts ruled the reintroduction was illegal, the Canadian wolves would have to be removed. That would be a blow to the long-term recovery of a species that once ranged across most of North America before being hunted to near-extinction.

“I like to call this an experiment in coexistence,” says Fischer. “The question is whether people and wolves can share the land.”