CHAPTKR 4: ENVERONMKNTAl. CONSKQUENCES 



controversy, improve communications with the public, increase public acceptance of the program, and 

 improve management decisions. The pubhc's safety would be enhanced because FWP could more 

 effectively provide information about the dangers of habituating wolves and safety tips about what to do 

 during encounters. 



Human Safety. People may encounter wolves more frequently as the population increa.ses in number and 

 distribution. In the presence of an immediate threat to themselves or another, a person may legally harass, 

 injure, or kill wolves under state law. FWP, WS, or local authorities may harass or kill wolves that 

 threaten public safety. Individuals found to injure or kill a wolf in the absence of a direct and immediate 

 threat or otherwise outside the provisions of Montana law would be pro.secuted under state laws. Upon 

 delisting from the federal and state lists, Montanans will be able to defend their domestic dog if it is being 

 attacked or killed by a wolf. Overall, public safety will be enhanced through timely agency response and 

 discouragement of wolf habituation. 



Private Property. FWP does not intend to restrict private property uses to manage a recovered wolf 

 population. While wolf use is primarily on public lands, some use of private lands does occur. Use of 

 private lands will undoubtedly increase in the future with increasing wolf numbers. FWP acknowledges 

 that wolves will use public lands in close proximity to private property. Use of private lands will increase 

 in the future with increasing wolf numbers, and conflicts may occur more frequently. 



FWP would proactively work with landowners to address their concerns about wolf use or to provide 

 technical assistance. FWP and WS would attempt to remove problem wolves in a timely, efficient 

 manner according to the adaptive management tools outlined in this alternative. Resolution may result in 

 the harassment or killing of wolves by agencies or by the landowner, under certain permitted conditions. 

 In some circumstances, wolves could be injured or killed by private citizens in defense of livestock or 

 domestic dogs. If not under immediate voice command, lion hounds or bird hunting dogs may be injured 

 or killed in wolf encounters. The economic impacts of wolf-livestock conflicts are addressed below. 



Economics / Livelihoods 



Livestock Depredation. Approximately 328-657 wolves would be present in Montana in 2015. Liberal 

 management tools would be implemented in 2006 if the population grew at the lower rate. If the 

 population grew at the higher rate, liberal tools would be implemented in 2004. Liberal management 

 tools are specifically intended to decrease livestock depredations and allow livestock owners to harass 

 wolves opportunistically, kill wolves caught attacking, killing, or threatening their stock, or receive a 

 special kill permit to remove a wolf or wolves causing chronic conflicts. Because of this increased 

 flexibility for livestock producers, FWP expects the depredation rate under this alternative to be about one 

 half of historical depredation rates. Additionally, adaptive management of the overall wolf population, 

 combined with removal of problem wolves, should result in lower livestock losses and greater social 

 tolerance (see Haight el al. 2002). The increased emphasis on working with landowners proactively to 

 minimize the risk of depredation is intended to decrease the overall losses. 



Approximately 25-51 cattle and 29-58 sheep would be lo.st to confirmed wolf depredation in 2015. 

 Another 16-.31 cattle and .^-5 sheep could be tallied as probable wolf depredation (Table .^5). These 

 numbers reflect the assumption that liberal management tools would reduce the potential losses by 50%, 

 compared to the losses per wolf in Alternative I (No Action). Liberal tools may actually reduce the 

 potential more or less than 50%. These los.ses are less than tho.se predicted under Alternative 1 (No 

 Action). FWP and WS would proactively work to minimize the potential for depredatiiMi through 

 technical assistance. Losses are likely to be less during the early years of implementation because the 

 wolf population would be smaller. 



126 



