By WHITNEY ROYSTER
Star-Tribune environmental reporter Monday, January 17, 2005




JACKSON -- Sure, you can talk about the economic implications of wolf reintroduction. Some people have lost money, others have made some.

But for Jon Robinette, the issue is much deeper.

"It changed our whole lifestyle," said Robinette, general manager of the Diamond G Ranch in the DuNoir Valley northwest of Dubois. "Instead of being able to go to bed and sleep, we have to get up and check for wolves."

Robinette has had his run-ins with wolves. He has lost six dogs since wolf reintroduction. He has had dogs killed out the back door. He has had horses killed in corrals and in pastures. He has lost cattle.

Still, Robinette, who says he was not in favor of reintroduction but recognizes that ways have to be found to live with wolves, said pinning a number to his losses is problematic.

"There's a whole scenario here, not just how much money did you lose," he said.

He has hired additional riders to look out for animals killed -- and to protect the evidence to determine what happened. That process, too, can take up to 12 hours, Robinette said, and the riders cost about $4,000 a month, for five months.

Then there's the impact to the cattle: Weights go down if cattle are stressed or being moved a lot. Reproduction rates might go down. Calves killed are a loss of about $1,000.

Before 1997, Robinette said the most cattle he lost was 22. In 1997, 61 calves were dead or missing. In 1998, 56 were lost; in 1999, he lost 53. Last year, there were nine confirmed wolf kills and 22 missing calves -- and that's just the number above those he knew wolves had nothing to do with.

While Robinette has lost money from wolves, others, like Bob Richard, might have made some.

Richard is the owner of Grub Steak Expeditions out of Cody, a custom sightseeing tour business.

Although Richard said an absence of wolves "would not change my business one iota," he does receive requests from people to see wolves.

"Last year we saw over 45 different wolves," he said. He takes clients to Yellowstone and into the Shoshone National Forest. Costs are about $375 for a full-day tour for two adults.

Last year, he said out of 1,900 clients, "a couple of hundred" wanted to see wolves. For the most part, people prefer bears or geysers, he said.

Have wolves helped his business?

"It has contributed to interesting private tours," he said. "Wolves were reintroduced, and I think we're going to see a very rough road ahead for the wolves over the next couple of years."

And there are people such as Rick Hoeninghausen, director of sales and marketing for Xanterra Parks and Resorts, which operates in Yellowstone National Park.

"There's definitely evidence that it has been helpful," he said of wolf reintroduction.

The company has offered wolf-watching packages, which has boosted winter tourism rates. More offerings in spring and fall have boosted sales as well.

Anecdotally, Hoeninghausen said he has seen a lot of people in turnouts on the road to Lamar Valley with spotting scopes, and more traffic on the road. Lamar Valley is a hot spot for wolves.

"From a business perspective, from a park experience perspective, I can definitely see that it has brought a positive impact," he said.

Gene Bryan, executive director of the Cody Chamber of Commerce, said wolves have been a "mixed bag" for businesses in Park County.

"There is an element here that supports wolf reintroduction in Yellowstone National Park but is very concerned about the impacts the wolves are having outside the park, i.e. on the traditional livestock industries related to cattle and sheep production and especially the impacts they are having on wild game populations -- elk, deer, bighorn sheep, moose -- and the resultant impacts on the outfitter industry and resident-non-resident hunting," he said.

Still, University of Montana economist John Duffield conducted studies to cast wolf reintroduction in an economic light, according to Associated Press reports. He asked people how much they would be willing to contribute to a fund supporting reintroduction.

Then, Duffield factored in the projected costs of reintroduction (opportunities lost to recreational hunters, livestock lost to predation, costs of wolf management). His analysis showed benefits outweighing costs by $6 million to $8 million.

Increased Yellowstone visitation because of wolves is expected to bring in up to $23 million, he said.

Managing wolves

Of course, there's a cost to the public for wolf management.

Wolf recovery coordinator Ed Bangs of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service said that agency spends about $200,000 each year for wolf management in Wyoming, compared with about $300,000 in Montana and even more in Idaho.

At the same time, the Wyoming Game and Fish Department last year spent just under $119,000 to manage the gray wolf in Wyoming, even though the state doesn't have jurisdiction over the animals.

In 2000, Game and Fish spent about $11,000 on wolf management. That figure dropped to $6,700 in 2001 but rose to $37,100 in 2002, according to Game and Fish data.

Wolf management costs rose dramatically in 2003 to about $506,000. Agency fiscal officers said most of the cost increase was attributed to the development in 2003 of a wolf management plan for Wyoming.

The agency's final management plan estimated the costs of a Game and Fish-managed wolf program after delisting would be about $395,000 per year. But Game and Fish directors later revised that estimate and now believe wolf management costs will approach $1 million annually after delisting.

They said the potential cost of the management program will depend on the complexity of the monitoring program and the amount of land occupied by wolves.

Defenders of Wildlife pays ranchers compensation for confirmed wolf kills.

In Wyoming, Defenders paid $28,096 in 2004, compared with $10,803 in 2003. In 2002, payment totaled $21,506 in Wyoming, and payments were about $14,000 in 2000 and 2001.

The group has paid out $144,000 to ranchers in wolf country around Yellowstone since 1995.

But all that talk of money means nothing to Robinette. Even though the ranch manager has seen his death losses skyrocket from 1.5 percent to about 8 percent a year after reintroduction, he still favors listing the animal as trophy game.

"Then you can manage the packs that are not acceptable," he said. With predator status for wolves, there is no compensation program. Livestock killed because of trophy game predation allows ranchers to receive compensation. The Legislature would have to change the rule to allow predator kills to be eligible for compensation, he said, and that means skunks, coyotes and a host of others would be on the list.

"The sooner we get the animals delisted, the sooner we can manage them," he said. "Wildlife is going to be helped, agriculture will be helped. It's not working the way it's going. I'm not anti or pro -- I just live with it."

Star-Tribune reporter Jeff Gearino contributed to this report.

Environmental reporter Whitney Royster can be reached at (307) 734-0260 or at [email protected].