Star-Tribune Editorial Board

As expected, Wyoming officials and several environmental groups this week sued the federal government over its decision to leave gray wolves in the state on the endangered species list while delisting them elsewhere in the Northern Rockies.

Both plaintiffs should be ashamed of themselves. The judges who consider the lawsuits - one in Cheyenne, the other in Missoula, Mont. - should dismiss them as soon as possible.

And Wyoming lawmakers should follow the example of neighboring Idaho and Montana by adopting a plan to manage wolves the way bears and mountain lions are managed, so that delisting could proceed in all three states.

As we've said before, there are certainly enough wolves in the region - as many as 2,000 at present - for them to be removed from federal protection. But the extreme positions being taken by Wyoming officials and the environmental groups are preventing a common-sense resolution to the situation.

The pro-wolf litigants go so far as to oppose the wolf management plans of Montana and Idaho, where the state wildlife agencies plan to use controlled hunting to keep wolf numbers in check and protect livestock. They say many more wolves are needed to assure that there's a healthy population of the animals in the region.

That's ridiculous. Wolf numbers have exceeded the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's recovery goals for years, and the hunting seasons and quotas planned by Montana and Idaho will not jeopardize the wolf population.

Wyoming officials, meanwhile, are seeking a court order to force the federal government to accept the state's management plan. It would classify wolves as predators that could be shot on sight in most of the state.

The state takes that position in spite of the fact that a federal judge in Montana last year rejected the state management plan - and in spite of the fact that it's unrealistic to expect an ultimate court ruling to take a species off of the endangered species list and give it absolutely no level of protection over much of its historical range.

Of course, both plaintiffs filed their lawsuits in venues they hope will be friendly to their positions. The environmental groups picked federal court in Missoula, Mont., which already produced an anti-delisting ruling. Wyoming officials, meanwhile, chose federal court in Cheyenne, where U.S. District Judge Clarence Brimmer has sided with the state in a couple of previous cases against the federal government.

One of those was the fight over snowmobiling in Yellowstone National Park. While a federal judge in Washington, D.C., ruled against a Bush administration plan to allow 600 snowmobiles a day to enter the park in winter, Brimmer struck down a Clinton administration plan to ban snowmobiles in the park. The dueling rulings have created a great deal of confusion about the future of snowmobiling in the park - and assured years and years of litigation, with still no resolution in sight.

The same scenario is likely in the wolf delisting issue - unless the federal judges in Wyoming and Montana both toss out the new lawsuits. Such action would send a clear message that the Fish and Wildlife Service's approach to wolf delisting is valid, and it could force both the environmental groups and Wyoming officials to come back to reality regarding their expectations for wolf numbers and management.

---

Our view

Our view: Judges should reject extreme positions taken by some environmental groups and Wyoming officials regarding wolf delisting.

Click here to submit a letter to the editor.

Editorial Board

Nathan Bekke, publisher

Chad Baldwin, editor

Kerry Drake, opinion editor

Sally Ann Shurmur, community news editor

Ron Gullberg, managing editor