DRAFT KIS APKKNDIX 1 



Some research has shown thai predation may influence prey populations through changes in recruitmenl, adult 

 mortality, or a combination of both {Gasaway et al. 1992. Ballard et al. 1997, Kunkel and Pletscher 1999, National 

 Research Council 1997, Mackie et al. 1998, Ballard et al. 2001). Increased adult female mortality from other 

 sources, such as hunter harvest or elevated overwinter mortality, may create conditions in which predation can limit 

 ungulate populations or slow population growth (Kunkel and Pletscher 1999). However, some biologists reported 

 that habitat and climate influenced deer populations more strongly than wolf predation (Wisconsin Department of 

 Natural Resources 1999). In Minnesota, wolves do not appear to impact white-tailed deer populations, although 

 there may be more localized effects (Mcch and Nelson 2()()(), Minnesota Department of Natural Resources 2001). 

 Recent findings in Yellowstone National Park indicate that winter severity has a dominating influence on wolf 

 predation patterns on elk (Mech el al. 2001) 



Generating an understanding of population dynamics and the interactions of predator and prey populations may 

 seem straightforward. In reality, however, it is extremely difficult. Theoretical models describe potential 

 interactions, but most have underlying assumptions, which may or may not be true. Considerable technical 

 challenges must be overcome to accurately assess how or to what extent any single factor influences populations. 

 Trying to accurately assess how two or more factors might be interacting with each other is even more challenging. 

 Documenting predation as a major limiting factor of ungulate populations requires intensive radio telemetry, 

 manipulation of both predator and prey populations, measurement of environmental conditions, a well designed 

 monitoring program, and a sustained long-term effort. Interactions between populations and with their physical 

 environments are also difficult to measure and interpret. Systems with multiple large carnivores, including wolves, 

 are even more challenging. 



This plan is not meant to provide a comprehensive summary of predator-prey interactions or wolf predation on 

 ungulates. However, some of published scientific literature reviewed for this document, is listed as a partial 

 bibliography in Appendix 4. Our understanding of how ungulates, wolves, other carnivores, and their physical 

 environments interact in Montana will develop through time. 



Adaptive Management 



Ungulate management in Montana balances many factors, including population welfare, habitat condition, 

 landowner tolerance, hunter opportunity, and the environmental factors influencing populations. Ungulate 

 populations are managed in a comprehensive, ecological way. The precision with which MFWP manages ungulate 

 populations is not intended to mitigate the impacts of single limiting factor such as wolf predation, lion predation, or 

 other mortality sources in and of themselves. Instead, ungulate populations are managed by taking into 

 consideration a variety of factors. Since elk, white-tailed deer, mule deer, and moose are the primary prey species of 

 wolves in Montana, MFWP will consider wolf predation, along with the other factors, so that ungulate populations 

 are managed in a comprehensive, ecological way. 



MFWP adopted an adaptive management program for mule deer and informally applies adaptive management 

 strategies to elk, white-tailed deer, and moose management. The goal of the MFWP deer program is to manage for 

 the long-term welfare of Montana's deer resource and provide recreational opportunities that reflect the dynamic 

 nature of deer populations (MFWP 2001 ). Management decisions are based on the welfare of the deer resource first 

 and recreational opportunities are provided consistent with the dynamic nature of deer populations. The goal of the 

 elk program is to maintain elk populations in a healthy and productive condition and to cooperate with public and 

 private land managers in the management of elk habitat. MFWP strives to provide diverse recreational hunting 

 opportunity, diverse viewing opportunities, and for general public enjoyment (MFWP 1992). Moose are managed 

 by similar philosophies. 



To proactively balance and integrate management of ungulate populations and the factors that influence them 

 (including wolf predation), hunter harvest opportunity for ungulates may be adjusted. Hunter opportunity already 

 changes in response to previous hunter success, hunter participation rales, or even access to private lands. Hunter 

 opportunity also changes in response to environmental events thai alfect ungulate populations such as drought, 

 severe winters, or poor recruitment. The presence of wolves within the yearlong range of a specific ungulate herd 

 adds another factor for consideration among all environmental and human-related factors. MFWP acknowledges 

 that changes in hunter opportunity may affect outfitters and non-resident hunters, in addition to resident hunters. 



34 



