revenue, develop new criteria used in approval or denial of a permit, and clarify laws 

 regulating importation of wildlife and exportation of animal parts. 



ISSUE #18 

 Predator Control — 15 comments t" *r' ■ 



Summary 



Public comment focused on abandoning the contribution to DOL for predator control. Some 

 comments indicated redirection of funds to deal with predation on game animals and other wildlife or 

 to other FWP programs. 



The minority point of view was that some compensation or assistance to landowners experiencing 

 depredation on livestock is warranted. 



Sample of Comments 



• Predators — look at other ways to handle predators, not just hunting and killing. 



• Contributions by the department to the DOL for predator control was originally done because 

 it was believed this donation might open more private land to the himting public. We do not 

 feel this is so any longer. 



• Predation is also a volatile issue with me. DOL is responsible for depredation, and FWP has 

 played a very minimal role in the depredation issue. 



• Under current law, DOL is the only resource livestock growers here in Montana have 

 available to them in the case of any losses that they experience. I think that a combined effort 

 involving the FWP, DOL, and the private sector could effectively address this growing 

 problem vdth not only better results, but also creating credibility in dealing with this problem 

 for all of us involved. 



• A review of the EIS indicates that none of the Altematives address this issue very well. The 

 definition of the terms management, control, and removal seem synonymous, but it is unclear. 

 In addition, if the control of these animals is a DOL function, why should FWP fund these 

 activities? If FWP is operating under the assumption that these animals are limiting game 

 populations, some documentation should be added to the final version of the EIS. 



Response: The biological, social, and economic impacts of FWP 's contribution to 

 DOL for aerial gunning of coyotes were summarized in Chapter IV of the draft EIS. 

 FWP proposes to continue its contribution under the preferred alternative although 

 with emphasis redirected to wildlife goals. Exploring incentives and alternative ways 

 of reducing the impacts of predators also is part of the preferred alternative. 



■■U'' 



