Montana Fish, Wildlife, and Parks (MFWP) is entrusted to conserve and manage wildlife in the GYA and in southwest Montana. The state of Montana has been successful in efforts toward this endeavor since statehood was enacted in 1889. With the reestablishment of wolves in the region around the turn of the 21st century, however, wildlife managers were faced with a new challenge. Before this occurred, wildlife conservation and management programs were implemented without a thought given to wolves or their impacts on the ungulate populations the agency managed. Facts and data about the impacts of wolves on elk in the region were sorely needed for wildlife conservation and management programs to adapt and remain successful.

With the intense public interest and the data needs of wildlife managers in mind, MFWP began a wolf-ungulate research project in 2001 to fill some large gaps in our knowledge base. This was a collaborative project with the Ecology Department at Montana State University, with involvement from Drs. Bob Garrott and Scott Creel. The project was designed to incorporate both intensive and extensive data collection efforts. Intensive study sites were identified, and individual project cooperators ran efforts at these sites. Data collection at the intensive study sites was intended to provide the detailed comparisons needed to understand the range of effects that wolves can have on elk population dynamics and behavior. Additionally, as a part of this overall effort, MFWP agreed to bolster ungulate monitoring efforts in a more extensive region in southwest Montana, as well as to continue monitoring programs elsewhere in the state to provide insights regarding the effects of wolves on ungulate populations over a larger area.

Due to the immediate need for information to inform the public conversation, scientific debates, and wildlife management programs, much of what has been learned from this research effort was published during the course of the project, in scientific journals and in agency annual reports. A list of scientific publications resulting from this project is contained in this final report. Further, Hamlin et al. (2008) summarizes much of the knowledge gained via comparisons between data collected at the intensive study sites through 2007. This report updates these comparisons with more recent data, and provides a more in-depth look at wolf-elk interactions in the Northern Yellowstone elk herd, which was lacking in previous publications and reports. This report also provides summaries from more extensive data collection efforts and MFWP monitoring programs, which have been absent from previous publications and reports, including summaries of data collected for deer and moose populations.

The major, overriding result from this research effort has been that one-size-fitsall explanations of wolf-elk interactions across large areas do not exist. However, we have learned that elk populations tend to become limited by predators when high ratios of predators to elk are reached, and this typically has occurred when multiple predator species are numerous within the range of one elk population. This limitation of elk populations in areas with numerous predators appears to become manifest through direct impacts on elk calf survival and recruitment.

The research presented in this report results from an active MFWP applied wildlife research program. Montana’s wildlife management programs have long been built upon the scientific investigations of a dependable team of research scientists working in close conjunction with very talented and dedicated staff wildlife biologists and managers. This particular research project is no exception to that trend, and it will undoubtedly serve as the basis of wildlife management programs and decisions well into the future.

Because of the large scales at which large carnivores live, their conservation cannot occur only within protected areas. They must therefore be conserved within multi-use landscapes where conflicts with humans occur. Conflicts are diverse and include depredation on livestock and competition for wild ungulates. However, one of the most serious is the fear of being injured or killed by a large carnivore. Man-killing by tigers, lions, leopards, pumas and bears (brown bear, black bear, polar bear and sloth bear) occurs on a regular basis with hundreds of people being killed annually on a worldwide basis. Although the danger that wolves pose to human safety remains controversial, may people that live in wold range report that they are afraid of wolves. This report attempts to examine the existing data about wolf attacks on humans during the last few hundred years around the world.

Currently there are an estimated 59,000-70,000 wolves (Canis lupus) in Alaska and Canada. Past reviews of wolf-human interactions concluded that wild, healthy wolves in North America present little threat to human safety. However, since 1970 some cases have appeared in the published literature documenting wold aggression toward people. A wolf attack on a 6-year-old boy near Icy Bay, Alaska in April 2000 generated debate in Alaska that challenged previous assumptions regarding the potential danger of wolves to people. At that time there was no recently compiled record of wolf-human encounters for either Alaska or Canada.

To provide a current perspective on wolf-human interactions, I compiled a case history that describes 80 wolf-human encounters in which wolves showed little fear of people. I obtained cases from biologists and law enforcement officers in Alaska and Canada, from public health records, from the published literature, and from interviews with private citizens who witnessed the events. I classified the 80 cases into 7 behavioral categories: 1) Agonism, 2) Predation, 3) Prey Testing or Agnostic Charges, 4) Self-Defense, 5) Rabies, 6) Investigative Searches, and 7) Investigative Approaches.

Patterns of wold behavior described in this case history provide a reference for management of wolves where frequent wolf-human encounters occur. Thirty-nine cases contain elements of aggression among healthy wolves, 12 cases involve known or suspected rabid wolves, and 29 cases document fearless behavior among non-aggressive wolves. In 6 cases in which healthy wolves acted aggressively, the people were accompanied by dogs. Aggressive, non rabid wolves bit people in 16 cases; none of those bites was life-threatening, but in 6 cases the bites were severe.

Wolf recovery in Montana began in the early 1980’s. Gray wolves increased in number and expanded their distribution in Montana because of natural emigration from Canada and a successful federal effort that reintroduced wolves into Yellowstone National Park (YNP) and the wilderness areas of central Idaho. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) approved the Montana Gray Wolf Conservation and Management Plan in early 2004, but delisting in the northern Rockies (NRM) was delayed. When federal funding became available later in 2004, Montana Fish, Wildlife & Parks (MFWP) began managing wolves in northwestern Montana under a cooperative agreement with USFWS. In 2005, Montana expanded its responsibility for wolf conservation and management statewide under an interagency cooperative agreement. The agreement allows Montana to implement its federally-approved state plan to the extent possible and within the guidelines of federal regulations.

Using federal funds, MFWP monitors the wolf population, directs problem wolf control and take under certain circumstances, coordinates and authorizes research, and leads wolf information and education programs. MFWP wolf management specialists were hired in 2004 and are based throughout western and central Montana. A program coordinator is based in Helena.

The Montana wolf population increased from 2005 to 2006. The increase is due to a real increase in actual wolf numbers primarily in NWMT and western Montana and the significantly increased monitoring efforts that led to verification of packs that actually existed in 2005 but could not be verified until more information was gathered in 2006.

A total of 60 verified packs of 2 or more wolves yielded a minimum estimate of 316 wolves in Montana. Twenty-one packs qualified as a breeding pair according to the federal recovery definition (an adult male and female with two surviving pups on December 31). Across the southern Montana experimental area (Central Idaho and Greater Yellowstone areas combined), there were 29 packs, 10 of which met the breeding pair criteria. A minimum of 149 wolves were estimated (73 in the GYA and 76 in the CID). Across northwest Montana, there were 31 packs, 11 of which met the breeding pair criteria. A minimum of 167 wolves was estimated in the NWMT endangered area.

Montana Wildlife Services (WS) confirmed 32 cattle, 4 sheep, 4 dogs and 2 llamas were killed by wolves in calendar year 2006. Additional losses (both injured and dead livestock) most certainly occurred, but could not be confirmed. Most depredations occurred on private property. Fifty three wolves were killed to reduce the potential for further depredations. Of the 53, 2 were killed by private citizens under the 2005 10(j) regulations and 2 were killed by private citizens who had been issued a permit in the experimental area of southern Montana.

Wolves in Montana prey primarily on elk, deer, and moose. Numerous research projects are investigating wolf-ungulate relationships. Montana Fish, Wildlife & Parks recently compiled research results of wolf-ungulate interactions in southwest Montana. This report and other information about wolves and the Montana program are available at www.fwp.mt.gov/wildthings/wolf.

INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND

Wolf recovery in Montana began in the early 1980’s. Gray wolves increased in number and expanded their distribution in Montana because of natural emigration from Canada and a successful federal effort that reintroduced wolves into Yellowstone National Park (YNP) and the wilderness areas of central Idaho. Montana contains portions of all 3 federal recovery areas: the Northwest Montana Endangered Area (NWMT), the Central Idaho Experimental Area (CID), and the Greater Yellowstone Experimental Area (GYA) (Figure 1).

The biological requirements for wolf recovery in the northern Rocky Mountains of Montana, Idaho, and Wyoming were met in December 2002. Before the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) can propose to delist gray wolves, federal managers must be confident that a secure, viable population of gray wolves will persist if protections of the Endangered Species Act (ESA) were removed. To provide that assurance, the states of Montana, Idaho, and Wyoming developed wolf conservation and management plans and adopted other regulatory mechanisms in state law.

In late 2003, all 3 states submitted wolf management plans to USFWS for review. Based on the USFWS’s independent review of the state management plans and state law, analysis of the comments of independent peer reviewers and the states’ responses to those reviews, USFWS approved the Montana and Idaho management plans as being adequate to assure maintenance of their state’s share of the recovered tri-state wolf population. Wyoming’s plan, however, was not approved. USFWS will not propose delisting until the Wyoming plan and associated state laws can be approved.

Purple= Montana Packs

Black= MFWP Regional Boundaries

The State of Montana recognizes the gray wolf as a native species and will integrate wolves as a valuable part of our wildlife heritage. Since 1973, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) has managed wolves as an endangered species in Montana, under the authority of the Endangered Species Act (ESA). Wolves are likely to be removed from the endangered species list within 3-5 years. Upon delisting, management authority for wolves will return to Montana Fish, Wildlife & Parks (MFWP). MFWP recognizes and accepts the challenges, responsibilities, and benefits of a restored wolf population. Managing gray wolves will not be easy, but wolf restoration is fundamentally consistent with Montana’s history of wildlife conservation. Long-term persistence of wolves in Montana depends on carefully balancing the complex biological, social, economic, and political aspects of wolf management.

State laws and administrative rules become the primary regulatory and legal mechanisms guiding management. Upon delisting, the gray wolf will automatically be classified as a species “in need of management.” MFWP and the MFWP Commission will establish the regulatory framework to manage the species thereafter. This Plan provides the foundation for wolf conservation and management upon delisting and describes a spectrum of management activities that maintain viable populations of wolves and their prey, resolve wolf-human and wolf-livestock conflicts, and gain the support of people with diverse interests. Much of it is based on the comments and recommendations of a diverse 12-member citizens group, the Montana Wolf Management Advisory Council, and an Interagency Technical Committee. MFWP intends to honor the diverse perspectives and interests of our citizens and the national public. The State will consider a spectrum of interests in designing and implementing a balanced, responsive program that recognizes the opportunities and addresses the challenges faced by people directly affected by wolves.

Wolves will be integrated and sustained in suitable habitats within complex management settings. The wolf program will be based on principles of adaptive management. Management strategies and conflict resolution tools will be more conservative as the number of packs decreases, approaching the legal minimum. In contrast, management strategies become more liberal as the number of packs increases. Ultimately, the status of the wolf population itself identifies the appropriate management strategies. Fifteen packs will be used as the trigger to change management, not as a minimum or maximum number of wolves “allowed” in Montana. MFWP does not administratively declare an upper limit or maximum number of individuals of any wildlife species in the state in the sense of a “cap.” Instead, MFWP identifies population objectives that are based on landowner tolerance, habitat conditions, social factors, and biological considerations. Wildlife populations are then managed according to the objectives and current population status, using an of array management tools.

Wolf distribution in Montana, as for other species, will ultimately be defined by the interaction of the species ecological requirements and human tolerance, not through artificial delineations that are administratively determined. Social acceptance of wolves transcends the boundaries of geography, land ownership, or land use designations just like a wolf pack territory boundary physically transcends them, too. An adaptive approach will help MFWP implement its wolf program over the range of social acceptance values now and in the future. Sensitivity towards and prompt resolution of conflict where and when it develops is an important condition of not administratively capping wolf numbers or defining distribution.

Ultimately, wolf distribution will probably encompass western Montana because of the predominance of public lands as compared to eastern Montana. Wolves will be encouraged on large contiguous blocks of public land, managed primarily as backcountry areas or national parks where there is the least potential for conflict, particularly with livestock. Wolf packs in areas of interspersed public and private lands will be managed in ways similar to other free-ranging wildlife in Montana and within the constraints of the biological and social characteristics, the physical attributes of the environment, land ownership, and land uses. Some agency discretion and flexibility will be exercised by necessity to accommodate the unique attributes of each pack, its history, the site-specific characteristics of its home range, landowner preferences, or other factors that cannot be reasonably predicted at this time. Management flexibility will be crucial in addressing all of the public interests that surround wolves.

On a broad scale, ungulate distribution and human settlement patterns largely define wolf habitat. MFWP ungulate programs link habitat and population management through sustained public hunting to achieve ungulate population objectives. In this way, MFWP takes an important habitat need of wolves into consideration. Our work, along with the amount of land held in public ownership and adequate legal protections, provides long-term habitat availability for wolves. Federal land management agencies are increasingly managing lands from an ecosystem-level perspective, considering all components and functional relationships. Yellowstone and Glacier national parks function as refuges at opposite ends of the geographic extent of wolf distribution in the northern Rockies. The network of public lands in western Montana, central Idaho, and northwest Wyoming facilitates connectivity between the sub-populations. The legal protections and public outreach described in this plan help ensure the integrity of wolf movement and occupancy of habitats between refuges.

Wolf population management will include the full range of tools from non-lethal to lethal and will incorporate public outreach, conservation education, law enforcement, and landowner relations. Wolves do not exist in isolation from their environment, nor should an effective management program isolate wolves from their environment. Management actions will be evaluated in light of prevailing conditions or extenuating circumstances. Wolf populations will fluctuate as a result of management actions, natural mortality, legal harvest, illegal take, wolf productivity, and ungulate population fluctuations. If there are fewer than 15 wolf packs in the state, management tools are primarily non-lethal, particularly in back country settings and for public lands near national parks. Examples of non-lethal techniques include monitoring wolf locations using radio telemetry, changes in livestock husbandry practices, harassment, relocation, or attempts to modify wolf behavior. A minimum of 15 packs is required to use more liberal management tools, including lethal methods to resolve wolf-livestock, wolf-human conflicts, or concern over a localized prey population in light of the combined effects of predation and environmental factors.

Gray wolves (Canis lupus) are thriving and expanding in number and distribution in Montana. This is because of natural emigration from Canada and a successful federal effort that reintroduced wolves into Yellowstone National Park (YNP) and the wilderness areas of central Idaho. There are probably more wild wolves in Montana now than at any time in the past 70 years. Since 1974, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) has managed wolves in Montana, under the authority of the Endangered Species Act (ESA). The biological recovery goal for the northern Rockies wolf population is a total of 30 or more breeding pairs for three years in the states of Montana, Idaho, and Wyoming, with breeding pair being defined as a male and a female that raised at least two pups to December 31. The biological requirements for recovery were met at the end of 2002.

But before USFWS will propose to delist, federal managers must be confident that a secure, viable population of gray wolves will persist if the protections of the ESA are removed. To provide that assurance, Montana, Idaho, and Wyoming must develop conservation and management plans and adopt other regulatory mechanisms in state law. Upon review and approval of the state plans, USFWS will propose to delist the gray wolf. Upon delisting, management authority for wolves will return to the state governments where wolves reside.

Purpose and Need for the Proposed Action

USFWS has managed wolves in Montana as endangered or as experimental, nonessential under the authority of ESA. In March 2003 USFWS down listed wolves in the Northwest Montana Recovery Area as threatened. Montana Fish, Wildlife & Parks (FWP) proposes to prepare and adopt a wolf conservation and management plan so that management authority can be transferred to the State of Montana because the biological recovery goal has been met. If Idaho, Wyoming and Montana do not develop and adopt conservation and management plans, which in combination must assure the long-term security of wolves in the northern Rockies, USFWS will not delist the gray wolf. In that case, wolves in Montana will continue to be managed by the federal government.

USFWS anticipates the delisting process could begin in 2003 or 2004, if wolf management plans are completed by the three states and pass independent scientific peer review. The State of Montana would adopt a wolf conservation and management plan prior to USFWS’s proposal to delist wolves, but the plan would not be implemented until USFWS officially transfers legal authority to the state. Under Montana statute, FWP is the agency charged with conservation and management of resident wildlife.

FWP recognizes the gray wolf as a native species and is committed to recovery of the species within Montana. The purpose of the plan is to manage wolves consistent with Montana’s own state laws, policies, rules, and regulations. FWP intends to implement positive conservation and management strategies to make sure that all federal requirements are met, recovery is complete, and that wolves are integrated as a valuable part of Montana’s wildlife heritage.

FWP also recognizes that the long-term future of wolves in Montana depends on carefully balancing the complex biological, social, economic, and political aspects of wolf management. FWP will consider the wide spectrum of interests in designing and implementing a flexible program that is responsive and addresses the challenges faced by people directly affected by wolves.

HUMAN SAFETY

Wolf attacks on people are very rare. Most wolves fear people and will run when encountered. However, wolves are visual learners and some may stop and stare. All wildlife can be dangerous and should be given distance and treated with caution. There have been a small number of documented wolf attacks on people in North America and contributing factors were most often related to habituation to people and/or conditioning to human foods. In areas where people live near wolf habitat it is especially important to follow these steps to discourage habituation:

AT HOME

Do not feed wolves or leave food outdoors, including pet food.

Do not feed deer, turkeys, or other wildlife that may attract wolves or other predators like lions and bears.

If wolves are seen close to people or human-inhabited areas, scare them away by making loud noises.

Report wolves that seem comfortable around people, seek human food, or frequent human-inhabited areas to FWP (see contact info on back of handout).

Hikers, campers, and hunters are more likely to come upon areas of wolf activity such as a kill site, denning area, or resting site. After detecting a person’s presence, some wolves may lope off quietly, others may bark or howl, or some may cautiously approach to get a better look. Hearing wolves barking and howling all around can be loud and startling. However, encountering wolves at close range is seldom a reason for alarm (unless you have a dog; see dog section on back) especially if you know what to expect. Once wolves have identified the disturbance, they generally leave the area. Vocalizing could go on for awhile as wolves regroup out of sight and pull back from the situation. If a wolf is killed, other wolves generally move off but may return to the site later. Here are some tips on what to do and how to avoid close encounters.

IN THE FIELD

Avoid areas of wolf activity including fresh wolf kills and denning areas. Do not approach wolves.

In the event of a close encounter, be calm and slowly leave the area. If approached, stand tall and make noise.

Hunters: hang game meat out of reach. Wolves may feed on gut piles and carcasses left out overnight but will usually move off upon your return.

Always carry pepper spray for any potential close encounter with wildlife.