Best choice for managing wolves

The state of Montana has moved into the wolf management business.

This is, of course, a touchy subject that triggers all sorts of volatile reactions from folks. Some wolf advocates have little trust in the state to manage relatively small populations on the Montana landscape, preferring that task be left to the heavy, protective hands of the federal government. Those who flat-out dislike wolves wonder why the heck the state is taking any role in protecting and managing them.

Both positions are off-center, missing the major point: Like it or not, wolves have protected status under the Endangered Species Act, and the state is just plain better suited to manage them than the federal government.

The logic here is simple, and it's based on the premise that government closer to the people is more responsive and effective in matching needs on a local landscape.

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service had two, sometimes three, people working on wolf management in Montana. This situation led to grumbling about slow responsiveness in wolf management and griping about how wolf managers were not in touch with ranchers and rural Montanans who live with wolves, people who are arguably carrying most of the burden when it comes to wolf recovery.

Every time there was trouble, the rancher had to wait for the federal guy to drive to Marion (or wherever) from Helena.

But over the last year, Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks has gradually assumed management authority over wolves. In Northwest Montana, state officials are now the "lead" wolf managers, and elsewhere in the state, they are soon expected to transition from an advisory role to the lead role. Just this year, the department has hired five people who specialize in wolf management, and just as importantly, they will be responsible for responding to public concerns and questions regarding wolves.

The state has a clear advantage. Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks has 400 some employees that are already ingrained in local communities. They know the country and the people, and these employees will be a valuable asset to the newly hired wolf management specialists. The new setup will be more responsive and it will be more effective than it ever was under federal management.

The big catch here is money. It was a federal initiative, presumably reflecting the will of the American people, that led to the natural and artificial reintroduction of wolves in Montana.

Any expectation that the cost of wolf management should be carried by Montana hunters and anglers - those who pay the way for Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks - is unacceptable.

So far, the federal government is paying the bill. If that continues, Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks can manage wolves as well as can be done.

But state management may never meet all expectations. Those who want the state to unleash a rampant wolf suppression program and those who fear that will happen are bound to be wrong: Eliminating viable wolf populations will simply put wolf management back in the hands of the federal government.