It is really difficult to know where to start on this issue. Forgive me if the following seems somewhat stern and if I seem to have little sense of humor on the subject. I mean no disrespect to any of you, especially those who live far away and really have no idea what is going on here but are curious nevertheless. Glad to have your interest sparked!

The history in simple terms is that Canadian gray wolves were introduced to Idaho beginning in 1996. Some unknown number were released between that year and for some years subsequently. numbers are estimated at 600-1200 and growing. Federal quota is, I believe 104.

Idaho game management BEFORE the introduction of the wolf was an amazing success story. There did exist a small number of indigenous wolves in addition to large numbers of cougar, bear and coyote, all of which prey on ungulate species during certain times of the year {bear and coyote during calving, mostly}.

The human element has been the top of the food chain, and the ability to adjust management to area-specific increases and decreases {due to disease, hard winters, etc} in the ungulate population is possible. Idaho is a big state, about 1/2 the size of Sweden with 1/7 the population with many different climates and terrains.

Peter, the term "elk herds" refers to large drainages or areas where herds over time acquire a home range. Thus you will hear Idahoans speak in terms of the "Bond Creek Herd" or the "Hugus Creek Herd" or some such. Some of these areas are relatively small, some vast, the size of Odense for example. Such animals are not fenced in or otherwise contained and some of those animals do migrate hundreds of miles.

Honestly, I mean no disrespect, but when people say "I believe wolves have a place in the wilderness" it demonstrates their complete lack of knowledge of wolf habits and the natural history of Idaho. This is a very common statement made by outsiders. Idaho is a land of animals and working people; towns, mining, hunting, farming, ranching, logging. What is "wilderness"? Usually, it means "somebody elses back yard".

"Wilderness" is a concept that Easterners and Europeans love to associate with the West. Or better put, those who don't live there love to associate with somewhere somebody else lives. Outsiders love to place their own philosophical constructs of "the way it was" on areas in order to feel like they are fixing the problems people have made. Trouble is, people are here to stay, and people have done a darn good job of building the "herds" and there is no earthly need to introduce ANOTHER carnivore into the sytem. We have plenty as it is, plenty of competitors with US.

It is also extremely naive to think in terms of releasing wolves in a certain spot as if they will stay there. Anyone who has a mental picture of these wolves remaining in a certain drainage or even state are deluded. Wolves travel VAST distances and descendents of wolves released in Idaho are already in Oregon.

Sorry folks, but you do not release wolves into country as diverse as what exists in Idaho and then using normal hunting methods control them. It is very similar to releasing a little smallpox just to make sure there is genetic diversity in the biosphere.

I confess I see wolves in terms as nothing more or less than a disease; brucellosis, snotsiekte, rinderpest, white line, hoof rot, orf, tapeworms, etc. They are in effect a four-footed disease, and serve no purpose in the ecosystems of Idaho than to replace man from the position of top dog, with the exception that rather than making their kills useful to people they perpetuate the disease. Remember Dr Zhivago looking into the microscope and being amazed at the beauty of the microbial activity? Then the instructor informing him that thos beautiful organisms do very ugly things to people? So goes the wolf in my opinion. I do not find the pretty, interesting, cuddly or necessary. And I see no difference between the release of the wolf in Idaho or the release of foot rot or BSE in England, or snotsiekte in RSA, or rhinonuminitis or West Nile Virus in Denmark. We vaccinate our cattle, sheep and horses against these scourges. What if the Government stepped in a said you horse lovers were no longer able to legally vaccinate your stock against this disease or that. Such was the situation with wolves and only recently may we shoot them in self defence or to defend stock. But we don't need them in the first place, and we can't be where they are very time!

Federal government quota has already been reached. The State of Idaho is attempting to establish a hunting season. These attempts will be harrassed by very well-funded extremists who will file suit to stop the process. All the while, wolf numbers will continue to grow at c. 30% annual recruitment, devastating the herds. Human hunting will be required to be restricted in order to accomodate the wolves. In fact, most of us believe the main reason for the funding of wolf recovery lawsuits is to cause the destruction or dramatic reduction of ungulate herds and the restriction or banning of human hunting as a result.

Getting rid of the bulk of wolves was a very difficult process in days gone by. It required poison, aerial shooting, dynamiting of den sites. Those methods are off limits to us now. An annual "hunting season" for wolves will be a farce. The State has already accepted the need for area-specific extraordinary culling of problem wolves but we are stuck with them it looks like. The main Idaho wolf recovery manager has told me that he anticipates restrictions on some hunting of elk and possibly deer to accomodate wolves.

Yes, they do interbreed with dogs. Yes, they will obliterate our indigenous wolves if they haven't already.

This whole damn Federal government experiment has cost millions and is one more typical, shameful attempt by the Feds to ram down the throats of the States policies that were unacceptable to the States and would be unacceptable in more populated areas, areas, such as back East, where wolves once ran free also.

My sincere hope is that the State does gain management authority and then that strong measures are instituted to reduce the number of wolves. In addition, I sincerely hope that some disease may take its toll on the wolf packs. Wouldn't it be wonderful if some beautiful organism could be found living free in the "wilderness", some organism like parvovirus that could find itself populating the back country of our great state, living in beautiful concert and ecological harmony with the wolf.