7. Bears involved in chronic, significant, or have a high probability to cause significant or chronic 

 depredations, will be removed as per the Interagency Grizzly Bear Guidelines when it is practical and 

 in a timely manner. 



8. Bears relocated because of conflict activities will be released in a location where the probability to 

 cause additional damage is low. Authorities have and will continue to cooperate to provide adequate 

 and available sites for relocations. Bears not suitable for relocation or release will be removed as per 

 the Interagency Grizzly Bear Guidelines. 



9. If appropriate, grizzly bears captured in management actions that are to be released into the wild will 

 be permanently marked with a unique identifying tattoo, ear tag, or identifying chip and radio 

 collared to follow their movements. 



Disposition Criteria for Bears Removed in Management Actions 



Captured grizzly bears identified for removal may be given to public research institutions or public 

 zoological parks for appropriate non-release educational or scientific purposes as per state laws and 

 regulations. Grizzly bears not suitable for these purposes will be euthanized. FWP will direct the 

 disposition of all parts of a bear killed for any purpose. While listed under the Endangered Species Act, 

 any such decisions will be made through consultation and in accordance with direction provided by the 

 Interagency Grizzly Bear Guidelines in consultation with cooperating federal agencies. 



Conflict Monitoring Protocol 



FWP will maintain a database on conflicts and conflict bears to assist with predicting and/or preventing 

 conflicts before they occur. All reported grizzly bear conflicts and subsequent FWP corrective actions will 

 be documented and summarized annually. Annual reports will detail the cause and location of each 

 conflict and management action. This will ultimately provide managers with a means of identifying 

 where problems are occurring and allow for comparisons of trends to be made according to locations, 

 sources, land ownership and types of conflicts. 



Alternatives Considered 



The following represents a list of alternatives and issues that were considered by FWP when laying out 

 its preferred approach to grizzly bear conflict management for western Montana. 



1. If evidence exists that a person deliberately precipitated a bear attack that resulted in their death, for example by 

 approaching and provoking a bear, the bear should not be removed. 



Although this is considered an alternative, in FWPs judgment, allowing bears that have been known 

 to kill someone to remain in the population will jeopardize local support and creates significant 

 liability issues. With effective management programs there will hopefully be very few of these 

 incidents. 



2. Livestock operators should be forced to absorb losses that occurred on public lands no matter ivhat the cost. 



In FWPs judgment, this approach fails to recognize the significant contribution of private lands, 

 which provide important bear conservation benefits. In fact, in many portions of western Montana 

 these same private lands are critical to the survival of the bear and to accommodating an expanded 

 distribution of the population. If a permittee could not manage depredation risks on public lands, the 

 converse is allowing them to eliminate risks (meaning bears) on their private lands. This either/or 

 approach is not a productive solution to these problems. Additionally, this approach actually 



41 



