LANDER - Once wolves are removed from the federal Endangered Species Act, those living in northwest Wyoming will be hunted and managed similar to the way bears and mountain lions are, if two regulations drafted by the Wyoming Game and Fish Department are adopted.

One of the new rules, and the most controversial, would loosen restrictions on killing wolves in the northwest quadrant of the state - where most of an estimated 360 in-state wolves live - and designate them as trophy game animals.

Wyoming's wolf management plan, approved by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Dec. 15, would classify wolves outside the northwest portion of the state as predators, like coyotes. People could kill wolves in those regions without a license and without limits, as long as they report the kills.

The second rule would allow landowners to be compensated for damage caused by wolves - the same way people are now compensated for damage caused by bears and mountain lions.

If gray wolves are removed from the Endangered Species Act on Feb. 28 as planned, Wyoming will take over in-state management of the predator at the end of March, barring legal challenges to the process.

People throughout Wyoming will have a chance this week to attend presentations on the proposed regulation changes. The Game and Fish Department will host a series of meetings today through Thursday.

Game and Fish has invited all agencies, groups and interested citizens to attend the meetings.

"At these meetings we will not be setting hunting seasons," said Eric Keszler, spokesman for the Game and Fish Department. "If everything goes according to plan, and if wolves are delisted, and the process isn't delayed by legal challenges, we will set wolf seasons at our regular season-setting meeting this spring."

People who want to comment on wolf hunting season, or on bag limits, will also be able submit their concerns this spring, Keszler said, as long as the delisting process continues undelayed.

An ongoing controversy

Wyoming's wolf management plan has been a consistent point of controversy throughout its development, and the new proposed regulations are stirring up familiar debates about the subject.

What some people see as a step in the right direction, others see as reprehensible.

Under the proposal, livestock owners could get a state permit to kill wolves if they have repeatedly "harassed, injured, maimed or killed livestock or domesticated animals."

Jim Magagna, executive vice president of the Wyoming Stock Growers Association, said his group is pleased, overall, with the wolf plan, and is happy with the new proposed regulations.

The stock growers support the intent behind the rules, he said, and will suggest only a few minor clarifications in the language.

"It would allow us to protect our livestock and other animals. And fish and game can take action to protect wildlife herds that are being disproportionately (killed off by wolves)," Magagna said. "What's going to be critical will be getting the funding for wolf management. Hopefully the Legislature will appropriate that."

Franz Camenzind, a biologist and director of the Jackson Hole Conservation Alliance, said his group is troubled by the proposed rules, especially with some of the language in a chapter that would designate wolves in the northwest as trophy game animals and loosen restrictions on killing them.

"One of the things that we're concerned with … is the use of lethal control as it applies to big game animals, and specifically elk on our elk feedgrounds," Camenzind said. "We feel that the language is too broad and will allow for too many wolves to be killed without hard scientific basis."

Camenzind said he can envision a scenario under the new rule where wolves from the five wolf packs operating around the Jackson Hole and Grand Teton National Park area could be killed by the state, simply for hunting on the state-run elk feedgrounds near Jackson Hole and disrupting the state's feeding program.

"The wolves will routinely visit these elk feedgrounds because that's where the elk population is artificially concentrated," he said. "We don't think wolves going to feedgrounds should constitute a death sentence; they're only doing what's natural."

What's unnatural, Camenzind said, is having feedgrounds in the first place. Under normal conditions the elk would be scattered across 100,000 acres of winter range in small groups, he said.

The new rule would loosen restrictions on killing wolves that are causing "unacceptable impacts" on ungulate herds. The problem with such a rule is that the definition of an "unacceptable impact" is completely subjective, Camenzind said.

"There is no scientific evidence that wolves have particularly impacted the wildlife herds. Most of the elk herds in the state are at or above the objectives (established by the state)," he said.

And while herd numbers will vary from year to year, biologists generally believe that wolf predation is beneficial to ungulate herds in the long term, because it keeps the prey animals fitter, he said.

While his group understands Game and Fish is simply trying to implement rules the state Legislature directed it to create, Camenzind said he believes the lawmakers' leadership on this matter is misguided and not supported by science.