By Ted Koch

For the past 2 years, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) has been reintroducing gray wolves (Canis lupus) to Yellowstone National Park and, with the assistance of the Nez Perce Tribe, to national forests in central Idaho. The progress being made in this recovery effort is due in part to an intensive outreach campaign in Idaho to work directly with many different segments of the public in addressing issues surrounding the reintroduction.

The core of our outreach approach was to be accessible, listen, and provide clear, honest answers to questions: Do wild wolves kill people? No. Do wild wolves kill livestock? Yes, but only occasionally, and the FWS is cooperating with the U.S.D.A. Animal Damage Control program to stop depredations when they occur. Also, a private organization, Defenders of Wildlife, is compensating ranchers for livestock taken by wolves. Does the presence of wolves cause land use restrictions? In the 10 years that wolf packs have been present in northwest Montana, the FWS has not restricted access by private citizens to any land specifically to protect wolves. In Idaho, the potential for restrictions of land use for wolves is even more remote.

Over the past 3 years, we learned that most people, including those in rural Idaho, find wolves interesting and exciting animals. Seventy-two percent of Idahoans said they supported wolf recovery in 1990. We also learned that rural Idahoans are more concerned about potential land use restrictions than about wolves, are strong wildlife advocates in general, and often have much useful information for implementing endangered species recovery programs.

The ultimate test of local cooperation came in April 1995, when a series of three livestock depredations occurred in Lemhi County that local ranchers believed may have been wolf-caused. Unfortunately, we were unable to follow up conclusively on the first two reported incidents because we did not learn about them until several days after they occurred. By that time, much of the information needed for an effective investigation was lost. We called a local county representative who is among the first to hear about depredation reports and asked for his help in involving the FWS more quickly in the future. The next week, he called and asked for our help investigating a depredation report. He sent an employee to the scene to prevent any disturbance of the evidence until FWS biologists arrived that afternoon. The landowner, a local veterinarian, and biologists evaluated the evidence together and agreed unanimously that a coyote (Canis latrans) had killed the livestock animal, not wolves. We could not have asked for better cooperation from local officials in implementing one of the most difficult aspects of the wolf recovery program.

There is growing evidence of this spirit of cooperation among rural Idahoans, the FWS, and the Nez Perce Tribe involving wolf recovery work. Travis Bullock of Mile High Outfitters, which operates in the Frank Church- River of No Return Wilderness in central Idaho, recently wrote a letter to the Wolf Education and Research Center, a private wolf recovery group based in Idaho, about his feelings regarding the wolf recovery program.

"When the idea [reintroducing wolves into central Idaho] first became known to local residents, two major fears struck me. First of all, I feared for the well-being of elk, deer, and [bighorn] sheep populations... My second fear was that, if needed, the [FWS] could step in and close certain areas for wolves... So far, neither instance has happened. After doing some research, my feeling is that this is not likely to happen.

My hope is to be able to co-exist with the wolves and to be able to show outdoor enthusiasts what a group of dedicated people did to put wolves back into the Frank Church Wilderness Area of Idaho. All in all, I believe that education and an open mind on the parts of all individuals involved is key to making this work for the good of the wolves and the public".

The FWS wolf recovery team counts these and many other outreach activities among the most rewarding and important experiences of the project because of the quality of the people we have worked with, the work we have been able to accomplish together, and the improved service we are delivering to our customers

^ [TOP]

Sidebar: The media often report about conflicts between residents in rural western communities and Federal natural resource managers. While it is true that problems sometime exist, most of our experiences working with people in rural areas have been positive.

One of the most important lessons we learned is that effective outreach goes beyond disseminating information. Most importantly, it involves listening and learning about local perspectives that may be important for implementing FWS programs. For example, Bob Loucks, the Lemhi County Agricultural Extension Agent, drove us around the county on one of our first visits. After having spent over two decades on the job, he shared with us all he had learned from local information, history, and lore about the last wolves that existed in Lemhi County early this century. This information has already been valuable in understanding potential wolf use in the area.