only a small percentage of all hunters would be afforded special privileges. Landowner preferences 

 might persuade landowners to protect wildlife habitats on their land. 



Emphasizing Conservation While Providing Recreation— VW? would continue emphasizing hunting 

 and trapping to manage wildlife populations but increase opportunity for nonhunting recreation. 

 Emphasis on conservation of harvested wildlife (big game, upland game, migratory waterfowl, and 

 furbearers) would maintain populations of these species at levels supporting sustainable harvests 

 while maintaining populations at levels compatible with other land uses. 



Greater emphasis on habitat protection for a broader range of species than under alternative 1 could 

 increase nimibers of some nongame species. However, it is difficult to predict overall population 

 trends because of natural factors, such as disease, weather, and predation that also influence 

 population numbers. 



This alternative would increase emphasis on recovery of T&E species above that of alternative 1 and 

 could aid in their recovery. Additional education, habitat protection, interagency cooperation, and 

 research could reduce human-caused mortality and the number of species needing protection under 

 endangered species statutes. 



Trophy Hunting— Under this alternative, FWP would continue to apply regulations in designated 

 geographical areas to limit harvest of males of some species of big game, such as deer and elk. FWP 

 would expect age diversity of males in these populations to increase as under alternative 1. A younger 

 age structure among males could result where such regulations were not applied with fewer males *V 

 surviving long enough to attain maximum body and/or antler size. These impacts would vary 

 geographically with legal and physical access. Species for which FWP regulates harvest by quotas 

 and drawn permits would continue to be less affected than species for which sale of licenses to 

 resident hunters is imlimited. 



Hunter Participation— Educational efforts directed at reducing barriers to participation, along with an 

 expanded hunter education program under this alternative, might increase participation in wildlife- 

 related recreation from alternative 1 . Increased participation in recreation could increase disturbance 

 or temporary displacement of wildlife and increase potential for T&E species to be taken through 

 misidentification. FWP would expect education and enforcement efforts to adequately mitigate this 

 concern and would not expect a small increase in numbers of hunters to markedly affect wildlife on a 

 statewide scale. 



Resident Hunter Opportunity— This alternative's provision of invoking Montana statute 87-1-301 (4) 

 (b), which gives the Commission rulemaking authority to regulate harvest by holders of nonresident 

 combination big game licenses could also increase FWP's ability to manage distribution of big game 

 harvests. Using this rule, the commission can restrict harvests by nonresidents in areas with 

 population declines while directing additional nonresident hunting pressure to other areas of the state. 



1». 



