these habitats and in so doing preserve connectivity for bears between mountain ranges. 

 Of all the western states, only Montana has an aggressive lands program, which includes 

 acquiring via purchase, conservation easements on private lands determined to be 

 important habitat that is seriously threatened. This program, by statute, requires our 

 habitat dollars to be spent across the state. In southwestern and west central Montana, all 

 of "Habitat Montana" dollars are spent conserving intermountain foothill habitat, which is 

 vital in conserving habitat for wildlife — including bears — and in maintaining 

 connectivity between mountain ranges. 



We will continue to work with private non-profit land trusts in their effort to secure 

 easements, primarily donated easements, from landowners occupying these intermountain 

 valleys. 



Montana FWP will continue to place an emphasis on conserving private lands adjacent to 

 highway corridors that have been identified as key wildlife crossing areas. FWP's 

 emphasis with the Montana Department of Transportation will continue to influence the 

 use of highway mitigation dollars to secure adjacent private lands fi^om additional 

 development. Secondary emphasis will continue to be placed on "engineered structures" 

 that facilitate wildlife crossings. However, during site-specific highway reconstruction 

 projects FWP will support fence and highway structure placements that facilitate wildlife 

 movement. 



Coordination Between Wyoming, Idaho, and Montana: Reviewers recommended that 

 all aspects of the management program be coordinated between the three states and/or 

 federal agencies in the greater Yellowstone area. FWP intends to continue the existing 

 coordination that is occurring under the IGBC under a newly formed committee if the 

 grizzly bear were to be delisted. Obviously, programs in the states are intertwined and 

 many aspects of the management plan cannot be implemented without participating in the 

 appropriate federal processes. 



Results of all coordinated monitoring of habitat, population, conflicts, etc., will be 

 reported annually and made available to the public. In addition, any meeting will be open 

 to the public as specified in Montana's statues. 



Population status/estimation: FWP received comments questioning the status of the 

 population. Some noted significant increases and others noted population declines. The 

 current status of the population is discussed in the plan. The best available data indicates 

 a population increasing in both numbers and distribution at the present time. This creates 

 some misunderstanding among those who believe the population is in decline and 

 therefore seek additional "protections," while others who note grizzly bear increases seek 

 more management flexibility. Population estimation is, and always will be, an area of 

 controversy in grizzly bear management. The plan uses a variety of widely accepted 

 approaches used in other areas, with other species, and with grizzlies in other parts of the 

 world. The plan recognizes that using a variety of information fi-om many sources is the 

 best approach to ensure reasonable estimates. Any estimates used will be explained in 

 full and will be open to public scrutiny and discussion. 



18 



