t ll.\l>^rKR 3: Ai;rKRNATlVK.S 



Table 22. Continued. 



* Montana shares a legal requirement with the states of Idaho and Wyoming to maintain a minimum total of 30 

 breeding pairs in the region. For the purposes of adaptive management, Montana will apply the federal breeding 

 pair definition (a male and a female and at least two pups on December 3 1 ) since not all packs successfully breed 

 and have pups every year. Montana would need to maintain 14-18 social groups (defined as four or more wolves 

 traveling in winter) statewide to reliably attain a minimum number of 10 breeding pairs with at least two pups on 

 December 3 1 . 



By applying the federal recovery definition of breeding pair, FWP would incoipoiate an added measure of 

 security and niaigin for error in the face of unforeseen future events, as well as greater flexibility for 

 management decisions on a day-to-day basis. Successful reproduction would be documented as well. 

 Because not every social group would meet the federal recovery definition as a breeding pair, tnore 

 groups of wolves would also exist on the landscape in assurance that Montana's minimum contribution 

 towards the tri-state total is achieved. As the Montana wolf population becomes more established, 

 through the monitoring program, FWP will evaluate the more general definition of social group (four or 

 more wolves traveling in winter) as a potential proxy for a breeding pair. (See Monitoring section 

 below). 



Wolf distribution in Montana, just as for all wildlife, will ultimately be defined by the interaction of the 

 species' ecological icquiiements and human tolerance, not through artificial delineations. Social 

 acceptance of wolves is highly variable across the landscape and among different landowners. As a wide 

 ranging carnivore, gray wolves are capable of traveling long distances in relatively short periods of time 

 and could cross many different property boundaries and land uses in a single day. Wolves will be 

 encouraged on large contiguous blocks of public land, managed primarily as backcountry areas or 

 national parks where there is the least potential for conflict, paiticularly with livestock. Wolf packs in 

 areas of interspersed public and piivate lands will be managed like other free-ranging wildlife in Montana 

 and within the constraints of the biological and social characteristics, the physical attributes of the 

 environment, land ownership, and land uses. Some agency discretion and flexibility will be exercised to 

 accommodate the unique attributes of each pack, its history, the site-specific characteristics of its home 

 range, landowner preferences, or other factors that cannot be reasonably picdicted at this time. 



Management flexibility will be crucial to address all of the public interests that surround wolves. Wolf 

 population management will include the full range of tools from non-lethal to lethal and will incorporate 

 public outreach, conservation education, law enforcement, and landowner relations. An effective 



72 



