PREDATOR CONTROL 



Control of predatory animals has historically been one of the 

 initial steps in the development of a game management program 

 in most states. Since certain predators utilize game species for a 

 portion of their diet, it seems to follow logically that if man wants 

 these species for his own use, he should eliminate the predator. 

 This line of reasoning is, however, not entirely correct since there 

 are many other factors associated with game abundance. 



It has been shown, for example, that when ringnecked pheasant 

 populations decline this decrease is noted not only in the areas where 

 predatory animals abound but also in island habitats where there 

 are no land predators. In other words, it is recognized that lack 

 of protective cover, food shortage, disease and numerous other fac- 

 tors may have a far greater limiting effect on some species than 

 do predators. Thus, in game management it is essential to evaluate 

 the point beyond which predatory control becomes an expensive and 

 ineffectual tool. 



Another consideration, of course, is the relative reproductive 

 potential of a species. It is undoubtedly true that predation has a 

 greater effect on the larger game animals such as deer and ante- 

 lope which reproduce at a slower rate than it has on those species 

 which propagate more rapidly. The problem is most complex since 

 it often involves unknown factors in what is commonly called the 

 "Balance of Nature." 



Fish and Game Department participation in predator control 

 activities were accomplished in two ways during the biennium. 

 First, by direct payment of bounties on certain species and second, 

 by cooperation with the Predator Control Board. 



Bounty payments were raised from $25.00 to $50.00 on mountain 

 lions shortly after the biennium started, and a $2.00 bounty was 

 paid on bobcats. The bobcat bounty was temporarily increased to 

 $5.00 for a period of slightly over a year during the biennium, and 

 then reduced to the original $2.00 payment. 



The Department also assisted in magpie and crow control by 

 paying up to 5 cents for each bird killed when local spoitsmen's 

 groups matched this with a similar amount. 



Cooperation with the Predator Control Board continued during 

 the past two years. This board consists of representatives from the 

 Montana Fish and Game Department, the U. S. Fish and Wildlife 

 Service, the Montana Woolgrowers and the Montana Livestock Asso- 

 ciation. Each contributed a portion of the cost of controlling preda- 

 tion, and control operations are handled by the Predator Control 

 Division of the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 



47- 



