Wolves are surpassing reproduction goals in the reintroduction states of the Western United States. Wolves populations in Idaho, Wyoming, and Montana are stable and the elk populations are reaching there lowest numbers in years. The government spends 1.1 million dollars a year to eradicate problem canines, yet the hunting season was closed this year due to a district judges decision to place the wolves back on the endangered species list. As Phil Price noted in a letter to Fur-Fish-Game Magazine, "the recent cancellations of wolf hunts in the American West points to a serious problem we face in the USA:emotion and opinion are trumping hard evidence."

Wolf populations are exceeding states' goals. Daniel Lamoreux reports in FFG that, "In less than 10 years, wolf populations in and around Yellowstone National Park had grown to the point that wildlife managers considered them maxed out. It is estimated that the U.S. department of Agriculture will kill an estimated 200 wolves (Lamereux, 2008).

It is perplexing in these hard economic times that hunters would not be allowed to control wolf populations. It would make sense not to spend state and federal dollars on wildlife management and to allow hunters to do the work instead. Not only would this cut costs it would help fuel economies. Hunting costs money, and hunters spend a lot of money. It would be hard to estimate how much a wolf season would actually bring to a state. In a report by U.S. Geological Survey the state of Wyoming currently receives over 4,000,000 dollars anually in its economy from the hunting industry --both resident and non-resident. The report indicates that non-resident hunters spend on average upwards of $2,000 for elk hunts. It would be easy to assume that a wolf hunting season would only further stimulate this much needed industry in the Western United States. But not only has the government blocked efforts from hunters (and their valuable dollars) and wildlife officials to open a season on the ever expanding wolf, it is also spending tax payers money to eradicate them. This fact confuses even wildlife officials who feel that a hunting season would not hurt the wolf population. As biologists Ed Bangs states in FFG "We'll still kill 250 wolves this year. The only difference will be no hunt this fall."

The anti-hunting coalitions that fought for the wolf to stay on the endangered species list seem to flash their brilliant understanding of wildlife management. Hunters and government officials strive to manage wildlife while adversary groups with little knowledge of the subject oppose them. Hunters have made the North American wildlife management systems one of the most successful on the planet and they actively control wildlife numbers preventing the wide spread of disease and the destruction of habitat. This is an example romance outweighing logic.

The evidence is overwhelming. Wolves are reaching their maximum capacity in certain areas. Wolves also prey upon farm animals, interrupting economic growth in small Western farm country. While the introduction of wolf seasons could bring precious dollars to a weak economy of Western states, anti-hunting coalitions block biologists efforts to open a hunting seasons- furthering the hindrance on the economy. All of that is without mentioning the fact that elk populations are down as the wolves feed on them. It is not just the sick and the weak, bull populations are there lowest points in decades. Elk hunting is a staple in the economy of these Western states; a severe population decline would be devastating to local economies. From a scientific and financial perspective outlawing the harvesting of wolves just doesn't make sense. The wolves numbers are still being controlled, we are just wasting an opportunity to earn precious money for the wildlife management industry and to give hunters an opportunity to do what they do best --manage wildlife.