DRAFn;iSAH'BNlHXI 



safeguarding livestock against wolf depredation, such as extra people to supervise livestock, extra guarding animals, 

 increased travel to check livestock more frequently, and veterinary expenses if livestock are injured. Some 

 producers report decreased pregnancy rates in cows harassed by wolves. Sometimes producers report retrieving 

 fewer head of livestock at the end of the grazing season, but cannot tlnd evidence of a carcass. Even with a carcass, 

 cause of death may still be unknown. Nonetheless, what remains clear is that livestock producers must reconsider 

 certain management practices in the presence of wolves to proactively minimize the potential for wolf-livestock 

 conflict. 



Compensation programs typically are established for problems that developed recently, were exacerbated by 

 governmental actions, or were caused by highly valued species (Wagner et al. 1997). Wolf presence in the northern 

 Rockies touches on all three scenarios. Defenders of Wildlife, a non-profit wildlife advocacy organization, 

 recognized the disparity of the costs and benefits for wolf restoration between the ranching coiTimunity and those 

 advocating wolf recovery. Their goal was to shift the economic liability away from ranchers and towards wolf 

 advocates through a compensation program that reimbursed ranchers for losses from wolf depredation (Fischer 

 1989). The Wolf Compensation Fund was established in 1987 and paid a total of $150,590 to ranchers in the tri- 

 state area between 1987 and February 2001 (Defenders of Wildlife 2001 ). In some cases, veterinary bills for 

 livestock injured by wolves were reimbursed. Funds from the Wolf Compensation Fund have also been used to 

 purchase livestock feed, lease supplemental pasture, purchase additional guarding animals or fencing materials, and 

 to cost-share other modifications to husbandry practices to proactively minimize the potential for future 

 depredations. Compensation addresses one of the major concerns about wolf restoration and has helped to increase 

 the tolerance for wolves. See Appendix 7 for additional data on compensation payments made by Defenders of 

 Wildlife between 1987 and April 2001. 



The State of Montana believes that compensation is critical to maintaining tolerance for wolves by livestock 

 producers who are adversely affected by financial losses due to wolves. At this time, it is unclear whether 

 Defenders of Wildlife will continue to offer compensation for losses when wolves transfer to state management 

 jurisdiction. The State of Montana intends to find or create an entity to administer a compensation program if 

 Defenders of Wildlife rescinds eligibility for Montana ranchers upon delisting. The entity or non-governmental 

 organization would be independent of MFWP and MDOL to retain impartiality. Negotiations would take place 

 directly with the producer. This approach is modeled after the existing arrangement with wolves under federal 

 management. Presently, the Defenders of Wildlife compensation program representative negotiates directly and 

 confidentially with the individual producer to determine compensation. This is independent from the USFWS 

 management programs and decision-making about what happens to the offending animals. The USFWS supports 

 the concept of compensation and believes that the existence of a private program has benefited wolf recovery (Bangs 

 per. comm.) 



The existing model has emerged somewhat through trial and error and the circumstances of individual wolf- 

 livestock conflicts in the northern Rockies. It has also evolved since its inception. Wildlife damage compensation 

 programs have great intuitive and theoretical appeal, and may be important tools in promoting wildlife conservation. 

 Compensation programs may also have unintended consequences with long range implications. They are also 

 costly, but there may be less costly ways of achieving the same ends. 



A scientific evaluation of state government predator compensation programs in Idaho and Wyoming and of the 

 Defenders of Wildlife programs in Montana, Idaho, and Wyoming for grizzly bears and wolves has recently gotten 

 underway. A partnership among private citizens, non-governmental organizations, state and federal agencies, and 

 academic institutions has formed. The objectives are to evaluate the effectiveness of these compensation programs, 

 examine the role compensation programs play in predator conservation efforts within agricultural settings, determine 

 how compensation programs can be structured and administered to meet the needs of livestock producers, and assess 

 the impact that compensation programs have on public opinions and attitudes towiu'ds predator conservation and 

 management. This effort is known as the Predator Compensation Research Study. A diversity of interests is 

 represented on the advisory committee, including representatives of the funding organizations and livestock 

 producers. The findings of this research effort will have important implications for the future wolf compensation 

 program in Montana. A final report is anticipated in spring, 2003. With new information in hand, MFWP will be in 

 a better position to work with Defenders of Wildlife or some other entity to help design a compensation program 

 based on the cooperative input from livestock producers, non-governmental organizations, and other interested 

 parties. 



43 



