By TOM KUGLIN Independent Record
Some hunters and trappers are concerned that non-hunter dollars could influence the way Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks manages wolves.
The mere mention of the word “wolf” in Montana stirs deep emotions among those who want to hunt or trap them and those who want them protected. At a Thursday evening public hearing, Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks will discuss its proposal for a “wolf conservation stamp” for nonhunters, which has some in the pro-hunting and trapping community concerned about how the agency would spend the new funding.
The prospective administrative rule would create a $20 wolf stamp available for residents and nonresidents. Anyone can purchase one or multiple stamps, with proceeds going to FWP for wolf management. The agency would consider money raised by the stamp as a donation. After paying for administration of the program, the money would be equally divided between the livestock loss reduction program, wolf monitoring, habitat protection or acquisition, research, and public education and outreach, and the hiring of additional wardens.
FWP Director Jeff Hagener will make the final determination on the stamp.
FWP has received more than 14,500 comments on the wolf stamp proposal to date, said Ron Aasheim, FWP administrator.
The number of comments easily exceeded the minimum — the lesser of 10 percent of those affected, or 25 — needed to trigger a hearing.
“We’re not surprised given the differences of opinion, but the volume is remarkable,” Aasheim said. “But then again it is wolves.”
The differences of opinion centers on the language of the proposal and if using non-hunter dollars would sway FWP’s wolf management strategy.
The proposal contains too many undefined or indistinct terms, specifically pertaining to habitat protection, and his organization plans to testify against it, said Keith Kubista, president of Montana Sportsmen for Fish and Wildlife.
“It sets earmarks or conditional uses by this stamp, and it’s being promoted by wolf advocates as the discouragement of hunting and trapping of wolves,” Kubista said. “We encourage non-consumptive users to contribute to management but not in this wolf stamp approach.”
Kubista stressed that his organization favors non-hunters contributing to wildlife management, but that MTSFW is concerned about a “fast-tracked” approach to such a monumental change. FWP should consider convening a council or committee to review the impacts of the stamp rather than unilaterally moving ahead, he said.
“The concept of the wolf stamp is a little troubling for us, predominately when it’s a single species stamp considered a donation when a conservation stamp already exists,” he said.
The Montana Wildlife Federation sees the wolf stamp as the first step in getting more funding to fish and wildlife management and plans to testify in favor of the proposal, said Nick Gevock, conservation director for MWF.
“Good wolf habitat is also good wildlife habitat and we should be welcoming this,” he said. “I’m not saying this proposal is perfect, but the alternative to keeping non-consumptive users from funding wildlife is privatizing wildlife.”
Gevock pointed to Sportsmen for Fish and Wildlife’s push for private, transferable hunting tags in other states as making millions of dollars for private landowners while making state wildlife agencies dependent on landowner tags as a source of funding. That approach would be wrong for Montana, he said.
The earmarks for preemptive measures to curb livestock loss by predators have proved valuable, Gevock said. In the Blackfoot Valley alone, predation has dropped by 96 percent since special fencing, carcass removal and range riders have been put in place, he said.
“We’re going to lose federal funding and we need to backfill that somehow,” he said. “Using non-lethal management could free up funding for more day-in, day-out management.”
While some groups may be interested in reigniting the wolf war and giving pro-wolf groups fodder to shut down hunting and trapping, MWF believes the stamp would be helpful and vary the contributors for state management, Gevock said.
FWP will hold public hearings across the state at 6 p.m. Thursday in Helena, Bozeman, Billings, Glasgow, Great Falls, Kalispell, Miles City and Missoula. The public can comment on the wolf stamp proposal until Aug. 22.
After taking public comment, FWP plans to file its decision with the Secretary of State by the end of September, with adoption of a new rule by Oct. 9.