But a clause to allow wolves to be killed when game herds don’t meet population goals is an “overly simplified solution to a complex problem.” Johnson wanted more specific references to tribal powers in the proposal.
I agree with Anthony. This is opening a doorway to blame wolves every time the population objectives are not what the wildlife division says they should be.
If population objective were purely derived based on science then I would have no problem with this clause, but has been demonstrated in the past, objectives are political moving targets. Given that, many will point a long finger at the wolf, even if there is no proof that wolves are responsible for any possible decline.
I'm having a hard time understanding why the fed is being so hands off in ID but more picky in WY....