Helicopters harrassing wildlife- is there a better way?

The increasing use of helicopters to dart and kill wildlife presents many ethical conflicts. Are these noisy and dangerous intrusions into wildlife areas that prohibit motorized activities harming our animals and birds, changing their behavior and disrupting the natural cycles of life? Is the solitude of deep wilderness areas to be sacrificed to the expediency of desk-mired politicians? If states are to manage these species, should they have to utilize the least harmful and intrusive techniques?

One group challenges the use of airborne gunning as needlessly disruptive and deadly to animals and humans alike. AGRO, A Coalition To End Aerial Gunning of Wildlife, has information, photos, and analysis on their website to help you decide if this is how you want the fauna in your national parks and federal lands managed:

AGRO

In Idaho, legislators are attempting to bully the U. S. Forest Service into allowing helicopter darting of wolves that they have recently been given the responsibility for managing under delisting from the ESA. From yesterday's Idaho Stateman:

Lawmakers grill Forest Service on helicopter use to manage wolves

Forest Service Regional chief Jack Troyer pledged Monday to help Idaho wildlife officials trap wolves in wilderness areas this summer.

But the state's Department of Fish and Game proposal to dart wolves from helicopters will have to go through environmental review first, Troyer told a joint meeting of the Senate and House resource committees. Fish and Game wants to place radio collars on the wolves so they can learn where wolves den and hang out when their pups are young, said Steve Huffaker, Fish and Game Director.

Fish and Game had proposed using helicopters to catch and collar up to 16 wolves in the Selway-Bitterroot, the Gospel Hump and Frank Church-River of No Return wilderness areas in Central Idaho. The Forest Service postponed a decision after it got 160 comments on its preliminary announcement. "We need to know how they use a big habitat ..." Huffaker said. "We need to know that so we can trap them if we need to."

Troyer, the regional forester in charge of national forests across southern Idaho, Wyoming, Utah and Nevada, said his agency will help Fish and Game catch the wolves without motorized vehicles in the wilderness using leg-hold traps and horses from existing air strips. Lawmakers expressed frustration that their support for helicopter use doesn't pull as much weight as about 100 public comments against the plan and the threat of three wolf advocacy groups to sue.

"We aren't asking for 100 Hells Angels to go in there on motorcycles," said Rep. Jack Barraclough, R-Idaho Falls.

Troyer said he must weigh the impact on the wilderness solitude helicopter landings would have against the ease in wolf catching Fish and Game would get to gather its scientific data. He also decided that using the agency's regulatory review shortcut — a categorical exclusion — might not stand a legal challenge. "We fully support the need for the data," Troyer said.

Troyer's appearance triggered a familiar theme in the relationship of Idaho and the federal agencies that control more than 60 percent of the state's land base. "I think what you're hearing here is Jack Troyer has more say about land management in Idaho that we do or the governor," said Rep. Scott Bedke, R- Oakley.

The Idaho Statesman- Feb. 14, 2006