Without support, caribou plan is a lost cause

The recent proposal presented by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to designate 375,562 acres of critical habitat for Southern Selkirk Mountain Caribou in North Idaho and Northeastern Washington has generated consternation and a great deal of controversy. Defenders of Wildlife, Selkirk Conservation Alliance and the Center for Biological Diversity petitioned the USFWS to designate critical habitat for the species and, according to a 2009 court-ordered settlement agreement, the service must designate critical habitat with a final rule by Nov. 20, 2012. The public’s concern about losing access to federal property for recreation to benefit this endangered species is real and must be dealt with in a transparent, straightforward manner.

Mountain caribou have been listed as an endangered species since 1984 and despite two attempted augmentations, a lot of time, money and management effort, the Canadian shared Southern Selkirk population of caribou has all but winked out on the U.S. side of the border. Why has the population failed to respond to extensive management efforts for the past 25-plus years?

Habitat changes, including the changes brought by the Sundance and Trapper Peak burns back in the 1960s, have reduced the amount of older forest stands suitable for caribou. Additionally, Selkirk caribou is a species existing at the very southern end of their range, spending very little time south of the B.C. border. The greatest cause of mortality over the past three decades has been predation, primarily by mountain lions. The recent resurgence of wolves as a top level predator poses a new and significant risk; wolves are the primary predator of mountain caribou elsewhere in their range. Designation of critical habitat provides little if any benefit to caribou if predation is what drives the population growth of this herd.

A well-respected trapper from the Priest Lake area reported last week that he was pursuing six different packs of wolves on the Priest River side of the Selkirk Crest. A hunter doing some preseason scouting for mule deer in August 2011 from the Upper Pack River reported observing a pack of 11 wolves harassing a small band of elk. Wolves exist on both sides of the Selkirks, and there’s good reason to believe that 50-plus wolves, added to the mountain lions, grizzly bears and lots of black bears which are all capable of eating caribou, and you can begin to understand why the public is howling about more restrictions on people.

Without public support, the entire ESA process is doomed to failure. With respect to caribou, the jig is up. The public has this figured out and it’s not pretty. They are correct in their analysis that the likelihood of recovering caribou in the U.S. portion of the Selkirks is slim at best. The deck is stacked against them and designation of critical habitat is not going to change that.

If this issue cannot be resolved to the satisfaction of the majority of our affected publics we are all wasting our time. This exceptionally small population of mountain caribou has only a slim hope of recovery as it is, but even less so if the people who live, work and play in and around their habitat view this animal as undesirable and problematic. That’s exactly what will happen if restrictions that don’t make sense are forced on people in the name of caribou recovery. The thought adding additional restrictions on 300,000-plus acres in North Idaho for a species that will not benefit from the designation of critical habitat appears to me and other folks following the issue to be foolish.

How do we get out of the current mess that we are in? For starters, suggest that the USFWS critically review what it is that they are attempting to do given the status of predators as described above. If we cannot create an environment in which this small population (30-50) mountain caribou, that spend very little time south of the Canadian border, has a chance of recovery, it is simply time to look at other alternatives.

The courts have ordered that critical habitat is the direction the USFWS needs to take. Given that direction, it would seems to make sense to zero in on those areas that research has shown are most important for caribou, rather than taking a very “broad brush” approach as the current proposal does. If caribou recovery is to have a chance, the situation suggests that more draconian predator management practices are needed in the caribou recovery zone. Who will pay for that? IDFG has and will continue to aggressively manage mountain lions populations, and has created liberal seasons for harvesting wolves, but that may not be enough. Wolf densities that are currently present are unacceptable and must be dealt if we are going to save this species. This will require USFWS agreement and support for managing wolves differently in the Selkirk range. Environmental activists who advocate for caribou recovery but oppose predator management will have to realistically assess their positions. Without the support of the public who lives in and around the caribou recovery zone it’s a lost cause.

Tony McDermott represents the panhandle on the Idaho Department of Fish and Game Commission and also serves on the board for the Kootenai Valley Resource Initiative.