Mr. Aney, in your recent column (“Making a place for predators, Thursday,” Nov. 4) you conveniently fail to mention that with the introduction of wolves, Idaho was to maintain 100 wolves or 10 breeding pairs. Idaho’s wolf population now exceeds 1,500 wolves.

When any game population exceeds the carrying capacity of a given range their numbers have to be reduced to achieve balance, and so it is with wolves. Liberalizing hunting seasons is the usual method, but this is not an effective option with wolves and has forced Idaho to take a more aggressive approach.

You state that killing wolves to increase elk numbers is “selfish.” This is a cavalier attitude that you can afford having held a government job with good pay and benefits while you have no regard for those whose livelihoods have been adversely impacted by introduction of wolves. Every elk harvested in Idaho generates thousand of dollars for Idaho’s economy, while wolves are a burden to the economy.

You state, we should “encourage” wolves “to live as wolves were intended.” Get real.

You also state your willing to give wolves their “fair share.” Would that be what they actually need to survive or does it include the animals they kill just for sport and don’t eat?

Running computer models for National Environmental Policy Act report does not make you an expert on wolves. I would suggest that your energy would be better served focusing on subjects you actually have some knowledge of and leave Idaho’s wolf problems to the experts with actual experience.

Dwight Clift

Pinehurst, Idaho