Associated Press

This photo provided by the Montana Department of Fish, Wildlife & Parks shows a gray wolf pup from the Calder Mountain pack along the Montana and Idaho borders west of Troy, Mont., in August 2005.

BILLINGS, Mont. - Since it first declared gray wolves in need of protection, the federal government has largely footed the bill to help rebuild the predator's population in the Northern Rockies.

But with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service now declaring wolves recovered and eager to hand off full management to the three states involved, the question becomes: Who will pay to manage the predators then?

It's not an easy question.

"It hasn't been worked out," said Eric Keszler, a spokesman for the Wyoming Game and Fish Department. "Obviously, it's going to be an expensive thing to do. I don't know where the money is going to come from."

The money spent by the federal government appears to have had the intended effect: The wolf population has risen from a few stragglers in northwest Montana to roughly 1,000 today in Montana, Idaho and Wyoming.

Many ranchers believe the wolves should remain the financial responsibility of the federal government, which - over their objections and worries about livestock losses - reintroduced the predators to Yellowstone National Park and central Idaho 11 years ago.

Some conservationists argue that if the states truly want to take on management, they should be willing to assume what comes with that - including costs.

And state wildlife managers, faced with budgets stretched thin by other obligations, want help from Congress - building from the idea that the American public has a vested interest in the long-term future of the iconic wolves.

"So far, Congress has supported the management of wolves to a fairly substantial level," said Steve Nadeau, large carnivore manager with Idaho's Department of Fish and Game. "But with all the funding shortfalls and all the agency cutbacks, the long-term prognosis is an open question."

Fish and Wildlife Service officials say there's little precedent for continued agency involvement once a species is delisted.

In over 30 years, just 10 species recovered by the agency have successfully come off the endangered species list, according to the agency's Michelle Morgan. Of those, the agency paid only for surveys of peregrine falcons, under a post-delisting monitoring plan for the raptor. "Right now we don't have any precedent other than that," she said.

"The goal is to recover species and give them to the states, and we can then put our resources into species with other needs," Fish and Wildlife spokeswoman Valerie Fellows said.

Costs and expectations

Managing wolves in the Northern Rockies isn't cheap: The Fish and Wildlife Service estimates that for each year wolves remain listed, it will cost the government about $2.7 million. That covers such things as monitoring, public outreach and tracking down and killing problem wolves.

That's more than what was spent in 2004 by state and federal agencies to manage nearly four times as many wolves in the upper Midwest, the agency's Ron Refsnider said, citing figures he said were the most recent. Federal wildlife officials earlier this month proposed delisting those wolves.

Ed Bangs, wolf recovery coordinator for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service in Helena, said the amount of money spent in the Northern Rockies is ridiculous.

"It isn't that wolves need this kind of management. It's people want this kind of management," Bangs said. "Everybody wants to know everything. Everybody wants a radio collar on them. Everyone wants to know what they're doing every minute of the day. Expectations drive costs through the roof."

A lot of that has to do with the culture of the West and the lay of the land, he said. It's far different than, say, the Midwest, where wolves were not reintroduced but naturally recolonized. And in the Northern Rockies, the potential for conflict is particularly high because of vast expanses of open country and a patchwork of federally protected and privately held lands, Bangs said.

"It's very hard to keep wolves alive out here," he said.

Ranchers including John Helle say wolves have cost them money, and they like knowing how many are around. Wolves, Helle said, can take a sizable chunk out of a producer's bottom line, requiring the need for more sheepherders and guard dogs and driving down livestock weights. That's not to mention the added stress of simply having wolves around.

He has tracking gear provided by the government that picks up on wolf radio collar signals. But, he said he doesn't know all the frequencies and cannot tell for sure if the signal is from "400 yards or 20 miles away."

"Wolves are in direct conflict with the way we live in the West now," said the Dillon, Mont.-area rancher, who believes wolves have been responsible for killing hundreds of his family's sheep but has been able to confirm fewer than 50. "We can always look back at history; they just did not fit with a civilized West."

The transition

State wildlife officials expect the cost of wolf management to rise, at least initially, once delisting occurs and management authority falls completely to them.

It's not clear yet when that might happen: Before delisting is proposed, all three states must have federally approved wolf management plans. Montana and Idaho do. Wyoming does not and has sued over the agency's rejection of its plan.

Currently, Montana and Idaho handle most day-to-day management responsibilities for wolves within their borders, but the Fish and Wildlife Service still handles law enforcement and litigation and is involved in ongoing research projects. Those duties also would fall to the states after delisted, Bangs said.

Wildlife Services, the federal predator-control agency that carries out kill orders for problem wolves, will continue its work after delisting, Bangs said.

Wolf management in Montana and Idaho is funded largely through money earmarked for that purpose in the Fish and Wildlife Service budget, Bangs said. Once wolves are no longer listed, he said, the administration and Congress will have to decide what's fair.

He believes there will be some measure of federal dollars and, like other wolf managers, doesn't believe the funding question will hold up delisting.

Still, they say, it needs to be decided. Federal grants could ease the cost of at least a portion of the states' management costs, but in some cases, such programs require a match. Montana is looking at how it might "share" the costs, tapping into federal, state and private sources.

Idaho, in its wolf management plan, says it's under no obligation to manage wolves if Idaho's congressional delegation can't secure "ongoing adequate funding" to cover the costs.

Kieran Suckling, a policy director for the Center for Biological Diversity, said he sympathizes with the states. However, "What I see now is a rush to delist, and everyone sitting around pointing fingers," he said.

"You have to create the safety net before you can leap off the cliff. They're basically saying, 'Jump, and we'll figure it out later."'

Wyoming's threatened and endangered species

Animals

Grizzly bear

* Scientific name: Ursus arctos horribilis

* Status: threatened

* Year listed: 1975

* Where found historically: throughout the West

* Where found now: in pockets around the West, including the greater Yellowstone area

* Estimated numbers when listed: 100-200

* Estimated numbers now: 500-600

* Future prospects: The Yellowstone bears have been proposed for delisting by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. A decision is expected in 2007.

Bonytail chub (fish)

* Scientific name: Gila elegans

* Status: endangered

* Year listed: 1980

* Where found historically: Colorado River Basin, including the Green River

* Where found now: Pockets still found in Green, Yuma, Colorado rivers

* Estimated numbers when listed: unclear

* Estimated numbers now: unclear; no wild chub caught in recent years.

* Future prospects: Continued federal protection

Humpback chub (fish)

* Scientific name: Gila cypha

* Status: endangered

* Year listed: 1967

* Where found historically: Colorado River Basin, including the Green River

* Where found now: Little Colorado River

* Estimated numbers when listed: unclear

* Estimated numbers now: unclear

* Future prospects: Humpback chub will be considered for "down-listing" to threatened when five viable, self-sustaining populations have been located or restored.

Kendall Warm Springs dace (fish)

* Scientific name: Rhinichthys osculus thermalis

* Status: endangered

* Year listed: 1970

* Where found historically: in pools of the Kendall Warm Springs in the Bridger-Teton National Forest near Pinedale.

* Where found now: same

* Estimated numbers when listed: unclear

* Estimated numbers now: several thousand

* Future prospects: Protected by the national forest and geology, the fish has no immediate threats.

Bald eagle

* Scientific name: Haliaeetus leucocephalus

* Status: threatened

* Year listed: 1967

* Where found historically: throughout most of the country

* Where found now: same, but in lower numbers

* Estimated numbers when listed: about 400 nests in lower 48

* Estimated numbers now: About 7,000 pairs

* Future prospects: Proposals to delist the bird out now

Black-footed ferret

* Scientific name: Mustela nigripes

* Status: endangered

* Year listed: 1967

* Where found historically: throughout the West

* Where found now: in Shirley Basin and other states in small numbers

* Estimated numbers when listed: in 1985, 18 wild ferrets

* Estimated numbers now: 400 wild ferrets

* Future prospects: More management to repopulate the ferret

Canada lynx

* Scientific name: Lynx canadensis

* Status: threatened

* Year listed: 2000

* Where found historically: Rocky Mountain, Upper Great Lakes, Upper New England states

* Where found now: Likely same areas but in smaller numbers

* Estimated numbers when listed: unclear

* Estimated numbers now: unclear

* Future prospects: Forests have implemented lynx conservation strategies to ensure no further harm is done.

Preble's meadow jumping mouse

* Scientific name: Zapus hudsonius preblei

* Status: threatened

* Year listed: 1998

* Where found historically: Colorado, Wyoming

* Where found now: Colorado, Wyoming

* Estimated numbers when listed: unclear

* Estimated numbers now: unclear

* Future prospects: Wyoming has challenged whether this species is a distinct subspecies of other jumping mice and should even be listed.

Squawfish, pikeminnow

* Scientific name: Ptychocheilus

* Status: endangered

* Year listed: 1967

* Where found historically: Wyoming's Green and Little Snake rivers, Arizona, California, Colorado, Utah

* Where found now: smaller numbers everywhere but Arizona

* Estimated numbers when listed: unclear

* Estimated numbers now: unclear

* Future prospects: continued protection

Razorback sucker (fish)

* Scientific name: Xyrauchen texanus

* Status: endangered

* Year listed: 1991

* Where found historically: Western states

* Where found now: Likely same areas but in smaller numbers

* Estimated numbers when listed: unclear

* Estimated numbers now: unclear

* Future prospects: Continued protection because of declining aquatic habitat

Wyoming toad

* Scientific name: Bufo baxteri

* Status: endangered

* Year listed: 1984

* Where found historically: Southern Wyoming aquatic environments

* Where found now: Mortenson Lake near Laramie, in labs around the country

* Estimated numbers when listed: unclear

* Estimated numbers now: 100 adults

* Future prospects: continued protection

Gray wolf

* Scientific name: Canis lupus

* Status: endangered 1967, experimental non-essential 2005

* Year listed: varies

* Where found historically: Rocky Mountain, Upper Great Lakes, Upper New England states

* Where found now: throughout Yellowstone ecosystem, Upper Great Lakes

* Estimated numbers when listed: none in Yellowstone

* Estimated numbers now: 1,000+

* Future prospects: Possible delisting, once Wyoming gets an approved state management plan

Canada lynx

* Scientific name: Lynx canadensis

* Status: threatened

* Year listed: 2000

* Where found historically: Rocky Mountain, Upper Great Lakes, Upper New England states

* Where found now: likely same areas but in smaller numbers

* Estimated numbers when listed: unclear

* Estimated numbers now: unclear

* Future prospects: Forests have implemented lynx conservation strategies to ensure no further harm is done.

Plants

Butterfly plant

* Scientific name: Gaura neomexicana coloradensis

* Status: threatened

* Year listed: 2000

* Where found historically: northern Colorado, southeastern Wyoming, western Nebraska

* Where found now: likely same areas but in smaller numbers

* Estimated numbers when listed: 50,000 individuals, only 10 percent stable or increasing

* Estimated numbers now: unclear

* Future prospects: continued protection

Blowout penstemon

* Scientific name: Penstemon haydenii

* Status: endangered

* Year listed: 1987

* Where found historically: Nebraska, Wyoming

* Where found now: Nebraska, Wyoming

* Estimated numbers when listed: 10 populations

* Estimated numbers now: As many as 5,000 individual plants are believed to grow in Nebraska's Sandhills area, while northern Carbon County hosts as many as 500.

Future prospects: continued protection

Ute ladies' tresses

* Scientific name: Spiranthes diluvialis

* Status: threatened

* Year listed: 1992

* Where found historically: Rocky Mountain states, Washington, Nebraska

* Where found now: Same, but in limited numbers

* Estimated numbers when listed: unclear

* Estimated numbers now: unclear

* Future prospects: continued protection