( llAriKK 3; Ai;rKRNATlVKS 



Other Wildlife. Same as Alternative 2 (Updated Council). 



Private Property. Same as Alternative 2 (Updated Council). 



Hybrids. Same as Alternative 2 (Updated Council). 



Wildlife Management Areas. Same as Alternative 2 (Updated Council). 



Alternative 4. Minimum Wolf 



Under this alternative, FWP would develop and adopt a wolf conservation and management program that 

 meets the minimum standards tor a secure, viable wolf population. It maintains the fewest wolves 

 possible to fulfill the legal requirement of wolf recovery. It represents the most aggressive management 

 philosophy and the lowest tolerance for wolf presence. Most of the underlying philo.sophies and guiding 

 principles endorsed by the Council are stripped away, although many of the same management tools 

 remain. This alternative most closely matches the "no wolf sentiment expressed in some public 

 comments, but a strictly "no wolf alternative was not considered for further development because it is 

 outside the sideboards of federal wolf recovery. 



Upon federal delisting, provisions of SB 163 lake effect and wolves would automatically be reclassified 

 under state law from "endangered" to a "species in need of management." This statutory classification 

 confers full legal protection. 



Implementation of this Alternative 



Implementation of this alternative is contingent on securing adequate funding for all program elements. 

 Implementation also requires FWP to develop and adopt final administrative rules and regulations under 

 the "species in need of management" designation. The FWP Commission must then approve and adopt 

 the administrative rules and regulations, including any special language pertaining to wolf management or 

 how FWP would interpret relevant state laws. This alternative would form the basis of those 

 administrative rules and regulations. Future FWP Commission action could reclassify the gray wolf as a 

 big game animal or a furbearer when it becomes appropriate to do so. The FWP Commission would 

 concurrently establish regulations pertaining to management and regulated harvest under the new species 

 designation. The Montana Legislature would establish a wolf license for regulated public harvest, the 

 license fee, penalties for illegal take, and the restitution value. MOUs must also be finalized with MDOL 

 and WS. 



How Does this Alternative Address the Major Issues? 



Wolf Management, Numbers and Distribution. This alternative grows out of the public comments 

 suggesting that gray wolves don't belong in Montana and that their presence through recolonization and 

 reintroduclion is entirely incompatible with the modern landscape. In the eyes of one citizen, "Montanans 

 were forced to accept these wolves." The underlying philosophy of this alternative is one of minimal 

 tolerance for wolf presence on both public and private lands. Becau.se Montana is "forced" to sustain 

 some wolves and that confiicts will occur and may be unresolvable, the approach will isolate wolves from 

 the rest of the FWP's wildlife management program. 



Modern scientific wildlife management principles have limited application under this alternative. The 

 gray wolf would not be treated as a native wildlife species and it would be managed differently from 

 mountain lions and black bears. Wolves would be managed as closely as possible to a legally classified 



90 



