12/15/05 Wolf reintroduction

Wolf Reintroduction How would you like to have a job where you could change the rules to help you be successful? I'm Jeff Keane; I'll tell you about one of those jobs right after this. As Oregon ranchers and wolf reintroduction enthusiasts offer comments to try to guide wolf management in that state, ranchers might want to study the way U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's Mexican wolf recovery team handles its job in the Blue Range Wolf Recovery Area in Arizona and New Mexico. In the beginning of wolf reintroduction there, the final environmental impact statement and final rule required removal of wolves that were livestock killers. That seems simple, fair and to the point. But, apparently, that worked a little hardship on the wolves and didn't fit the Fish and Wildlife Service's wolf recovery plan well enough so the rules were changedwithout public input. Now a "three strikes" rule is the agency's policy and it goes something like this. Three confirmed kills and the guilty wolf will be removed, but the wolf must be positively identified, each year starts a new "three strike" count, the counts don't consider unconfirmed, probable kills or injury to livestock, and incidents with multiple livestock involved are only considered one strike. If a wolf does get three strikes, it can be lethally removed or more than likely placed in captivity and then re-released to start another three strike count. I wonder if the wolves are given livestock abuse counseling while they are in detention? I'm Jeff Keane. Range Winter 2006