Star-Tribune Editorial Board

The federal government deserved to be chastised by Gov. Dave Freudenthal last week for its flip-flop on the state's wolf management plan.

But the plan itself still isn't worth fighting for. We can't understand why the governor is intent on going back to court to defend it.

Nearly everyone agrees that Wyoming would be much better off if the state managed its wolf population instead of the feds. But the state's stubbornness means that by the end of the year, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is likely to have a plan to delist wolves from federal protection in Montana and Idaho, but not Wyoming.

Very little that the Fish and Wildlife Service has done has made sense. The agency repeatedly rejected Wyoming's plan to allow wolves throughout most of the state to be classified as predators and shot on sight. But earlier this year, without explaining its decision, the feds reversed course and accepted Wyoming's plan. In March, the agency lifted federal protection for gray wolves under the Endangered Species Act, and the state took over.

After a coalition of environmental groups sued, U.S. District Judge Donald Molloy of Montana reinstated federal protection in the three states last month through a preliminary injunction. He criticized Wyoming's dual classification of wolves as trophy game animals in the Yellowstone area and as predators everywhere else.

Fish and Wildlife immediately caved in, announcing it accepted the judge's decision and that it would take over management of wolves in the state. Wyoming Game and Fish disbanded its wolf management team, and the state's attorneys prepared to proceed alone in the court battle.

The governor's office accuses Fish and Wildlife of allowing "politics and public relations concerns" to drive the decision-making process for a new delisting rule, instead of science. The state maintains that its dual classification of wolves would allow an adequate number of breeding pairs to survive. That's debatable, but having the debate at all really isn't essential.

It's generally politically popular in Wyoming to fight the federal government, but in the case of wolf management, it just doesn't make sense when the alternative is preferable. Why not extend the trophy game zone near Yellowstone to include the entire state? Then Game and Fish could create a hunting season that would allow wolf packs to be thinned but not decimated. That should satisfy the judge's concern and let delisting occur.

In addition, the plan would allow for ranchers throughout Wyoming to be compensated for livestock losses due to wolves. That hasn't been part of the dual classification system.

Ranchers would still be able to kill wolves that destroy cattle and sheep. The only difference would be that in most instances, state wildlife agents would do the killing.

Wyoming's renewed refusal to drop the predator status wipes out all of the progress that has been made on delisting in recent years. The state is back to square one, looking at a lengthy legal fight while the feds prepare to allow Montana and Idaho to move forward with their respective state plans.

The Legislature will have an opportunity to address the issue in January. Let's hope that a majority of lawmakers will see the wisdom in dropping their insistence on the dual classification system so the state can once again take over wolf management from the feds. If not, state management isn't likely to happen any time soon.