With a daily hunting range of 30 miles or more, it is only a matter of time before wolves become a topic of conversation outside of livestock and conservation circles. Congress and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service have several blueprints for the kind of predator management plan that makes sense, they simply need to adapt one that can be used by each state in the western U.S. effectively.
Wolves have harried livestock raisers and ungulate populations in several western states since they began to reemerge on the landscape in the early 2000s. States have largely had a mélange of management approaches that ranged from “hands-off” to active management which included hunting and trapping permits, specific breeding pair counts, annual reviews of overall populations, and periodic reviews of population recovery goals. These varying approaches, often between neighboring states, has highlighted the need for a more streamlined methodology.
In late January of this year, a bill to remove endangered and threatened species protections for gray wolves under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) was filed in Congress. Last week, the bill was heard in a subcommittee on water, wildlife, and fisheries. Historically, protections for wolves under the ESA have frequently changed based on the Presidential administration. In 2021, wolves were removed from the ESA, the following year their protections were restored by court order. In 2024, the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service announced it was developing a nationwide plan to delist gray wolves throughout the entire United States with the hope of ending the constant push and pull of litigation around the predators. It is expected to be completed by the end of 2025.
There are an estimated 3,440 wolves scattered across nine western states in the U.S. Each state has different definitions of recovery, and each has a different structure for how to handle depredation and damages. There are pros and cons to each states’ approach to management with Arizona and New Mexico taking a slow and steady approach to the reintroduction of Mexican wolves in each state. Montana has maintained a “public harvest” of wolves for nearly 20 years. Idaho, too, has hunting and trapping permits for wolves.
States in which wolf recovery and management plans are regularly reviewed and updated appear to have the most successful populations in the western U.S. Idaho lists a current estimated wolf population of 1,337 and Montana shows an estimated population of 1,087. Idaho’s wolf management plan was updated in 2023; Montana’s was updated in 2023 and implemented this year.
Given the relatively small population estimate in California – 45 – and the recent reintroduction of wolves in Colorado, now is the ideal time to evaluate how to create a framework for overall management of wolves as they begin to become a part of new landscapes in the west. In states where they are well established, Idaho, Montana, Oregon, Washington state, Wyoming, Arizona, and New Mexico, boots-on-the-ground experiences can also inform the overall management structure.
For example, regional benchmarks for population recovery could be assessed by breeding pairs and total population count during a specific time of year rather than dispersal over a specific area. Washington state requires 15 breeding pairs for three consecutive years with four pairs dispersed in each of the three identified recovery regions of the state and three additional pairs dispersed anywhere in the state before wolves could be considered for state delisting. Oregon, on the other hand, required just four breeding pairs for three consecutive years for state delisting to be considered.
Having the flexibility of review and integration of new science that Idaho and Montana have incorporated into their wolf management plans along with the “fair market value” compensation plan for depredations as outlined in Colorado’s wolf management plan provides a good starting point for a west-wide management framework.
By taking the best parts of management frameworks from each state in the western U.S. and discarding the most detrimental pieces of states’ management plans, Congress and USFW can put together a framework that provides flexibility, conservation, and compensation in a single plan. Predator management and proper use of the Endangered Species Act is paramount to the health of both predator and prey species in the western U.S. It is abundantly clear the current framework of the ESA is not working. Creating a new way to manage wolves would be a step in the right direction.
Pam Lewison is the Director of Agriculture Research at the Washington Policy Center and a Pacific Research Institute fellow. She co-owns and operates a family farm in Eastern Washington state.
