CHAPTER 4: KNVIRONMKNTAI. CONSI'QUENCES 



frequently. Any conflicts on private property would be resolved with aggressive management tools, not 

 incrementally through adaptive management as described under Alternative 2 (Updated Council). In the 

 ca.se of livestock, this would be accomplished either by WS or by the landowner through special kill 

 permits. Management tools would be implemented specifically to di.scourage wolf u.se of private 

 property. The economic impacts of wolf-livestock conflicts are addressed below. 



Economics / Livelihoods 



Livestock Depredation. This alternative predicts that there will be about 154 wolves in Montana in 2015. 

 FWP expects that the historic per wolf depredation rate would be reduced by 75% from the estimate used 

 for Alternative 1 (No Action). Approximately six cattle and seven sheep would be lost annually to 

 confirmed wolf depredation. Four cattle and one sheep could be tallied as probable depredation (Table 

 39). Losses may be greater in the early years of implementation if more wolves are in the population. 



Montana Agricultural Statistics Service (2002) reports that, as of January I, 2001, the average value of all 

 cattle in Montana was $850 per head. Sheep averaged $94 per head. Purebred lines may. in fact, have a 

 significantly higher value, while other animals may be a lower than average value. The predicted 

 economic loss is $5,758 for confirmed depredation, $3,494 for probable depredation, and $752 for other 

 domestic animals (Table 39). Livestock producers may incur other expenses, including increased 

 management costs due to changes in husbandry practices or materials to improve the physical security of 

 animals. These costs are difficult to estimate and have not been quantified. Presumably, livestock 

 producers already incur some management costs to mitigate for predator losses. 



The estimated annual livestock depredation losses for this alternative are small compared to either the 

 statewide value of annual cattle and sheep production or to the level of annual livestock losses to 

 predators other than wolves and to natural causes. But wolf losses are not spread evenly among all 

 Montana livestock producers or shared by the industry as a whole. These losses are borne by individual 

 livestock producers and the losses may in fact, be significant in proportion to the size of the operation. 

 Furthermore, these losses represent a new added risk to some individual livestock producers, depending 

 on where they are geographically located with respect to wolf pack territories. 



This alternative does not include a compensation program because landowners and livestock producers 

 are able to aggressively manage situations on their private properties through special kill permits provided 

 by FWP. On public lands, livestock producers could kill a wolf it is attacking, killing, or threatening their 

 livestock. Aggressive management tools should limit livestock depredation to the lowest levels of any 

 alternative. In another sense, this alternative places the highest management burden on private property 

 owners and livestock producers to carry out a significant amount of control work-which is a different 

 type of cost to them. 



Big Game Hunting. Same as Alternative 2 (Updated Council). 

 Regional Economic Activity . Same as Alternative 2 (Updated Council). 

 Outfitting Industry . Same as Alternative 2 (Updated Council). 



Recreational Values. 



Hunting Values . Same as Alternative 2 (Updated Council) 



138 



