Regarding Howard Goldstein's opinion piece of Feb. 27 titled Let science, not politics determine wolves' fate; let me say I found it an example of "creative" writing at its "best."

Creative because the author inferred his beliefs onto those of the Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation in a manner that they are one in the same, however nothing could be further from the truth. He calls for science to rule over wolf management; we agree but not just science he selects or invents for his agenda.

The foundation holds to the basic principles of the North American Model of Wildlife Conservation in that wildlife belongs to all of us and need to be managed so the various species are sustainable forever.

According to Mr. Goldstein, that apparently holds true for all species except the wolf which he places above and beyond, and at the expense of other wildlife.

When wolves are managed, he refers to that as "mass wolf killing programs." Animals are managed and harvested every year in Idaho and all states by the thousands; Mr. Goldstein doesn't call that mass killings. It is called management for a reason.

Mr. Goldstein didn't object to the recovery goals agreed to by all in 1995; he didn't dispute the science of the recovery goals some 20 years ago. But now he does? For the record no one disputed the recovery goals established for the gray wolf reintroduction, no one.

Mr. Goldstein wants RMEF to raise its voice regarding wolf management practices in the Frank Church-River of No Return Wilderness. We did raise our voice.

We are currently seeking intervener status in a lawsuit brought by environmental groups against the Idaho Department of Fish and Game seeking to stop the wolf management.

Elk numbers in central Idaho are down 43 percent since 2002. Where is the outcry over that science?

Mr. Goldstein, are those mass killings? IDFG has every right and responsibility to manage all game including wolves within the entire state of Idaho.

The foundation has provided $725,000 in grants regarding wolves and wolf-prey relationships with $214,000 of that total specifically targeted for wolf management activities. Why? So wildlife managers know how many wolves are really out there, where they live and roam and so they can be managed to a level already agreed to (by all) and balance can be found on the landscape.

Remember that the minimum recovery level was established and agreed to by all scientific parties involved with the Idaho wolf reintroduction back in the mid-1990s and since that time, no new science (that would be none) exists that refutes those numbers are viable.

Environmental and animal rights groups prevented the implementation of management activities by filing lawsuit after lawsuit even though the wolf population reached the agreed upon levels more than a decade ago. How is that science-related?

Where is the integrity from those who all agreed to this experimental reintroduction yet now want to continue to move the goal posts of recovery?

Right now, wolf populations are an absolute minimum of 400 percent larger than the recovery goal, and probably higher.

The gray wolf is in no danger of being relisted and IDFG has a responsibility to manage wolves.

Stop crying wolf Mr. Goldstein and let the science do its job.

M. David Allen is the president and CEO of the Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation.