CHAPTKK i: inJKl'O.SI'. ANU NKKF) I OK ACTION 



Media coverage of the community work sessions, and the public's other opportunities to comment, was 

 extensive. More than 800 people participated by attending a work session, and thousands wrote coimnents 

 or sent emails, representing nearly every Montana county. In addition, comments came from 49 states, 

 including the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico; and eight foreign countries, including Australia, 

 Canada, Denmark, Germany, Israel, Mexico and the United Kingdom. Although MEPA requires at least 

 30 days for an EIS "scoping" period, FWP designed a 60-day process to ensure that the public had 

 adequate time to consider this important issue. The first public comment phase of Montana's process to 

 develop and adopt a wolf management plan closed April 30, 2002. 



In all, FWP collected nearly 4,000 comments and written correspondences. Because many of the written 

 letters and E-mails identified more than one issue or concern, FWP recorded nearly 6,700 individual 

 comments. Upon review of the process, the comments, and the worldwide attention paid to this issue, 

 FWP Director Jeff Hagener said Montana's effort to manage wolves will ultimately result in a 

 groundbreaking wildlife management plan. 



Because wolf recovery and the potential for the state to regain management authority are issues of such 

 great significance to Montana, Governor Martz reappointed the original Wolf Management Advisory 

 Council in January 2003. Their charge is to assist FWP through the final stages of state planning efforts 

 and completion of this EIS process. After FWP completely analyzes the public comments received on the 

 alternatives presented in this draft EIS, it will consult with the Wolf Management Advisory Council and 

 the FWP Commission. FWP will then select a final alternative - one that was presented in the draft EIS, 

 one that is a combination of alternatives presented in the draft, or a new one that is generated through 

 public comment and for which a foundation already exists in the draft EIS. 



Next, FWP will prepare a final EIS that includes a summary of the major conclusions and supporting 

 infomiation from the draft EIS and the agency's responses to substantive public comments received on 

 the draft. The final EIS will also disclose the agency's recommendation, or proposed decision, with an 

 explanation of the reasons. FWP will also prepare a Record of Decision (ROD), sometimes called a 

 decision document, which is a concise public notice that announces the decision, explains the reasons for 

 the decision, and explains any special conditions surrounding the decision or its implementation. The 

 ROD could be a separate document from the final EIS. Ultimately, the ROD and the final EIS will 

 comprise Montana's official plan to manage a fully recovered endangered species - a plan that was 

 largely crafted by the public. 



Issues IdentiHed through Public Scoping and Evaluated in the EIS 



The Montana Wolf Management Advisory Council identified roughly 30 issues during its deliberaUons in 

 2000. During the 2002 scoping process, FWP asked Montanans to identify issues in a similar manner. 

 Comments received during the public scoping period (community work sessions, written letters and 

 postcards, and E-mail correspondence) were entered into a computer database for systematic analysis. 

 There was a significant degree of overlap between the council's list and the list of issues generated by the 

 public. In fact, many public comments supported the work of the council and agreed with its 

 recommendations. 



Through the analysis, broad themes emerged. They encompassed issues, questions, and concerns about 

 wolf management, wolf numbers, wolf distribution, state and federal administration, predator and prey 

 relationships, program funding and various considerations for human health and safety, livestock, wildlife 

 habitat, land management, and more. With a full spectrum of comments associated with each issue, FWP 

 often received conflicting public comments. For instance, some comments directly opposed one another 



