> FWP will attempt to minimize the number of bears removed from the population. This will 

 also be the case even if this population is delisted. 



> Develop a cost-sharing program to do preventative work, thus encouraging a variety of 

 interest groups to work together with FWP to minimize problems and increase tolerance for 

 bears. 



> FWP will review and adjust the guidelines for dealing with damage to beehives (Appendix 

 E). 



> FWP will consider the actions and potential impacts of programs in Wyoming and Idaho 

 when determining our response. 



> Determination of nuisance status and response is described in Appendix F. 



A summary of conflicts with humans and grizzlies in southwestern Montana is presented in Figs. 

 7 and 8. A review of these figures indicates that conflicts are currently increasing as the bear 

 population continues to increase in numbers and distribution although they can vary greatly on 

 an annual basis. Considering how many people live, work, and recreate in southwestern 

 Montana, it is important to note there have been minimal conflicts overall. However, nuisance or 

 "problem" bears that are not managed successfully may threaten the entire grizzly bear program. 

 When bear problems are not adequately addressed, there are negative consequences for the 

 individual bear, the public, and the reputation of grizzlies in general is damaged. The primary 

 goal is to maximize human safety and minimize losses to property while maintaining viable 

 populations of grizzly bears. Strategies that address nuisance bears should be timely and 

 informed. Successful co-existence and social acceptance of grizzly bears is largely dependent on 

 prevention and mitigation of human-bear conflicts. The cause, severity, and appropriate 

 response to human-bear conflicts often varies considerably from one incident to another, making 

 a broad range of management applications desirable to wildlife managers. Outside of the PC A, 

 greater consideration will be given to humans when bears and people come into conflict, 

 provided problems are not the result of intentional human actions. Agency management of 

 nuisance bears will be based on risk management protocols that consider the impacts to humans 

 as well as the impacts to the bear population, and will range from no action to lethal control. 

 FWP will use an effective "rapid response" system for nuisance bear determination and control, 

 and will employ any technique that is legal, effective, and appropriate to manage the conflict 

 (Appendix F). 



No Action : FWP may take no action when the circumstances of the conflict do not warrant 

 control or the opportunity for control is low. 



Aversive Conditioning, Deterrence, or Protection : FWP may employ various options that deter 

 or preclude the bear from additional depredation activities (i.e., electrical fencing, bear proofing 

 buildings or containers, etc.). 



44 



