LT 47d Mm 76/4/9793 - 1993 ANNUAL REPORT - of the MONTANA INTERAGENCY WOLF WORKING GROUP PREPARED BY the U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE List of Figures TABLE OF CONTENTS Figure 1. Number of wolf reports from Montana, 1980-1993. Te 1 Figure 2. Locations of reported and confirmed Wolf Population Monitoring....................:cc000 2 wolf activity and monitored packs in Montana, 1993. Spruce Creek Pack............... npievdaniane 2 Figure 3. The proposed experimental population North Camas Pack.................ccccccceeeee 3 areas in central Idaho and the Yellowstone area where experimental population rules will apply. South Camas Pack.................:cccccsceseeees 3 List of Tables Murphy Lake Pack.................ccccccccsceeeees 4 Table 1. Wolves captured and radio-coliared in Sawtooth Pack..............ccccccccceseeseeeeeeen 4 Montana and southern British Columbia, Canada, 1993. Ninemile Pack................cccccccceseeeeeeees 9 Table 2. The dynamics of wolf packs in Montana, aera hie 9 1993. North Fork Flathead River/Glacier Table 3. Known wolf mortality in Montana, 1993. Ee 9 Table 4. Known wolf dispersal in Montana, 1993. ITT essn inttanseenannincnenbiaiinaannaniiaits 6 Table 5. Mortality of radio-collared female white- Si tntensiensetnannnsnnsnnanenemnnnmnmnennantiinn 6 tailed deer, elk, and moose in the North Fork of the Flathead River drainage. Other Research................cccccccccseseseeeees 6 Table 6. Causes of ungulate mortality in the Information and Education..................cccccee 7 North Fork of the Flathead River drainage, December-March, 1992-1994 . Wolf/Livestock Interactions. ...............ccccccceeee. 7 Table 7. Summary of wolf depredations and Environmental Impact Statement...................... 8 control in Montana, 1980-1993. En 8 INTRODUCTION Appendices The only known breeding population of wolves in the western United States is located in Montana Wolf Working Group................ 8 northwestern Montana. Pup sroduction in Montana was first documented in 1986. Since Pertinent Gray Wolf Literature................ 9 then the population has increased steadily. In 1988 the Interagency Wolf Working Group Wolf Literature for Educators.................. 13 (Working Group) was formed to implement and coordinate wolf recovery activities in Wolf Educational Trunk Locations.......... 1S northwestern Montana. An overall strategy to 1 facilitate wolf recovery was developed then and continues to be carried out, largely as planned. Phase 2 confirmation surveys were conducted by U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Readers are referred to previous annual (USFWS) personnel, other agency personnel, reports of the Working Group for information and volunteers from Wolf Haven International. about the history of the wolf in Montana, the Numerous sightings in the Big Hole area in recovery plan, goals of the Working Group, southwestern Montana prompted surveys by programs, personnel, and the status of the groups in August. Sixty-one miles were surveyed recovery program. for wolf sign by foot, trail bike and vehicles by agency personnel while howling surveys were This report was prepared to update conducted by Wolf Haven volunteers. Tracks of interested parties about ongoing wolf recovery in 2 apparent lone wolves were documented and a Montana during 1993. The status of and efforts possible wolf scat was collected. Wolf Haven toward the 3-phase wolf population monitoring volunteers also conducted surveys in the Yaak system, wolf and ungulate research, information River drainage without finding conclusive and education, and wolf/livestock interactions evidence of wolves. and control activities are presented. An Environmental Impact Study (EIS) on the reintroduction of wolves to the Yellowstone National Park and central Idaho was released in draft form in 1993. This is also discussed, as S88s it would impact the way wolves would be managed in rm= = approximately the southern half of S Montana. 158 —s WOLF POPULATION NORFUE MPOBREs=.ATR =hS = . MONITORING —_ » === Wolf observation and f4 a~ ]i ao| o om| © __a—— <—~ — a = reporting cards were used in 1960 1981 1962 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1993 as the initial part of the 3 Figure 1. Number of wolf reports from Montana, 1980-1993. phase monitoring system to detect breeding pair and pack The final phase of wolf population activity in Montana. The number of observations monitoring involves capturing and radio-collaring declined from 370 in 1992 to 180 in 1993 (Fig. 1). wolves. The USFWS and University of Montana In areas of known wolf pack activity, the general research personnel captured and radio-collared public and agency personnel were more aware of wolves from each of the 5 resident packs and the wolf presence, and the novelty of seeing wolves Spruce Creek Pack, which resides primarily in or wolf sign has decreased. We would expect Canada (Table 1). Major events and changes in fewer reports from these areas after wolves have each pack are as follows. been present for more than a year. Providing the public with a means to assist in locating wolves in Spruce Creek Pack areas without known pack activity is still extremely important and eventually will lead to Githough the Spruce Creek Pack’s the discovery of additional wolf packs as they territory is essentially north of the international form. border in Canada, occasionally the pack or pack evidently killed by other wolves, —_ and Wolf 9377 died from being Spruce Creek one 408203 10 2- kicked by an ungulate, probably a : moose or elk. Both of these Meth Cones i oore — : wolves were necropsied by 43 + oe eons personnel at the Montana Af a oe name : Department of Fish, Wildlife and Parks laboratory in Bozeman. An —— i 9293 ; adult female (Wolf 9375) is missing ~— — _ and presumed to have dispersed Murphy Lake 6/22 1718 1718 from the pack (Table 4). 6/23 2627 2627 6/23 3637 3637 — = _ South Camas Pack Sawtooth 2/26 8808 8808 9/22 2829 2829 aes — -— The South Camas Pack’s Ninemile 8/27 4243 4243 territory extends along the North Table 1. Wolves captured and radio-collared in Montana and | Fork of the Flathead River south of southern British Columbia, Canada, 1993. Polebridge and east of the river in Glacier National Park (Fig. 2). In members enter Montana along the North Fork of the Flathead River (Fig. CANADA 2). Six adult wolves were observed in mean Guanes the pack in March 1993, and 6-7 pups — were produced in April (Table 2). An Y | aes ome adult female (Wolf 9271) dispersed from :s ouTn caaias the pack in late 1992 and was later shot ¢T ouPSOPANL S near Cranbrook, B.C., Canada (Table 8 SAWTOOTH 3), where wolves can be legally harvested. North Camas Pack The North Camas Pack's territory extends north along the North Fork of the Flathead River from Polebridge nearly to the Canadian border, then east, encompassing the Kintia Lake area (Fig. 2). Ten adult wolves were observed in the pack in March, and 8 pups were produced in April (Table 2). Four known mortalities occurred in 1993 (Table 3). An adult female (Wolf 8961) and an unmarked pup were found dead in Canada laie in the fall. Speciaatl tihes Nattisona l i Cons 1(Rw04eEs8 tE C2T) IBITY Bs eae Forensics Laboratory in Ashland, . reanuroace acrusitY a a te ac Oregon, determined that both animals — died from gunshot wounds. Two other Figure 2. Locations of reported and confirmed wolf wolves later died: Woif 9379 was activity and monitored packs in Montana, 1993. from Highway 93 near the KNOWN Murphy Lake Ranger Station. MORTALITY This case is still under Spruce Creek investigation. A pup (Wolf 2223) that was captured and North Camas radio-collared in October was South Camas found near the train tracks just Murphy Lake west of Stryker in December, apparently killed by the train. Sawtooth Predispersal behavior, including Ninemile 6 extra-territorial forays to and from areas 45-80 miles south of Table 2. The dynamics of wolf packs in Montana, 1993. the pack’s core territory, were documented during 1992 and past years, there did not seem to be a distinct early 1993 for an adult female (Wolf 1718). By territorial boundary between this pack and the late fall, 1993, Wolf 1718 was with another, larger North Camas Pack. In the past 2 years, wolf in the Thompson River area and presumed however, little overlap has occurred between the to have dispersed permanently. An aduit male 2 packs. Thirteen adult wolves were observed in (Wolf 3637) that was collared during the summer the pack in March, and 8 pups were seen during of 1993 dispersed from the pack in late the summer (Table 2). In mid-summer, an adult December to the Ninemile Valley, an area male was shot near the North Fork road. Events approximately 100 miles to the south (Table 4). surrounding this incident are being investigated Based on tracks in December, we estimate that by the USFWS Special Agents. A female, (Wolf 3-5 wolves made up the pack at the end of the 9167), left the pack in late 1992 and was killed in ear Canada (Table 3). Another female (Wolf 9269) ’ dispersed from the pack but her whereabouts are Sawtooth Pack not known (Table 4). @arly in 1993, 2 wolves were observed on Murphy Lake Pack several occasions near the Sun River Wildlife Management Area west of Augusta. The animals €arlier we thought that the Murphy Lake appeared to be residents of the area and not Pack ranged only in the Murphy Lake/Fortine transients. Plans were made to capture and Creek area south of Eureka, and that another wolf pack existed in the Marion/Island Lake area to the southwest. From information obtained through PACK radio-tracking and evidence Spruce Creek B.C., Canada gunshot gathered in 1993, it became Clear that the Murphy Lake North Camas N.Fk. Flathead, Canada gunshot N.Fk. Flathead, Canada gunshot Pack uses this entire area, N.Fk. Flathead, U.S. ungulate which encompasses over 400 N.Fk. Flathead, U.S. wolves mi square (Fig. 2). Estimated South Camas Canada gunshot pack size in March was 6 N.Fk. Flathead, U.S. gunshot animals, and 3-4 pups,were produced in April (Table 2). Murphy Leake Murphy Lake, Hwy. 93 gunshot pup W. Stryker, MT train Two known mortalities occurred during 1993 (Table Table3 . Knowolwf monrtal ity in Montana, 1993. 3). An adult male was shot had been produced. By _ late fall, all 3 radio- collared yearlings and North Camas 9375 unknown the adult male were South Camas 9269 F unknown missing from the area. Murphy Lake 1718 F 17-18 Thompson River, MT Some predispersal 3637 M 36-37 Ninemile Val ley, MT behavior had been noted among the yearlings, and Ninemile 1920 M 19-20 unknown 3839 F 38-39 unknown we assume that dispersal 4041 F 40-41 unknown accounted for their 4243 F 42=43 unknown none ? none unknown absence (Table 4). A none ? none unknown male (Wolf 3637) from Table 4. Known and suspected wolf dispersals in Montana, 1993. the Murphy Lake Pack, the adult alpha female, a radio-collar both animais. The adult male (Wolf wolf with a smaller track 8808) was darted with a tranquilizing dart from a (possibly the pup), and 1 other animal made up helicopter. Upon examination, it was discovered the pack at the end of 1993. Whether the male that this wolf had originally been captured and from Murphy Lake arrived before and possibly ear-tagged as a pup by personnel with the contributed to the disappearance of the yearlings University of Montana Wolf Ecology Project in and the alpha male, or whether he arrived 1988 in the Wigwam drainage in southern B.C.., afterwards, is unknown. Canada. The female was not captured. She produced 4 pups in April and the pack spent the RESEARCH summer primarily on private ranch land in rolling prairie habitat (Fig. 2). In September, 2 pups North Fork of the Flathee. River/Glacier National were Captured and radio-collared (Table 1). The Park pack travels extensively into the Bob Marshall Wilderness and the Sun River Game Preserve. Br. Dan Pletscher, University of Montana, In late October the pack made a 27 mile and graduate student Kyran Kunkel collected excursion in 2 days to the China Wall area in the additional field data on a study which integrates Sun River Game Preserve, before returning to and expands research work initiated by the Wolf the Sun River Game Range area by October 28. Ecology Project (UM) in the early 1980s. The Study examines the relationships between Ninemile Pack wolves, their ungulate prey, and habitat use by both. Radio-collared deer, elk, and moose have The Ninemile Pack’s territory been killed by wolves, mountain lions, coyotes, encompasses the Ninemile Creek drainage and bears, and humans (Table 5). Since the initial surrounding area (Fig. 2). In March the pack project began in 1990, 312 ungulates have been consisted of 2 adult wolves and 5 yearlings captured and radio tagged: 59 deer, 53 elk, and (Table 2). A “satellite” wolf was also seen 46 moose. Work continues as radio collars are occasionally with the pack. The alpha female maintained on ungulates, and ungulate home exhibited little to no denning behavior during the range characteristics are defined. Efforts will spring, and later howling surveys elicited only also be made to radio-locate deer and elk during adult howls. It was specuthalt ano tpupes dwer e winter even if the wolves are not present in the produced in 1993. Late fall observations of the area. pack revealed 1 slightly smalglraey rwol f, which made the 8th gray animal in a pack that normally Information about the cause of ungulate consoif 7s grtay ewodlve s. From this and snow mortality in Table 6 was obtained from tracking tracking evidence, it was concluded that 1 pup wolves and investigaing kills that were four. establishment in the Murphy Lake area. This Mortalities Cause Study continues as data are being collected Mt. Lion on deer population characteristics, 8 Wolf 2 Bear movements, and causes of mortality, 3 Coyote + Human including wolf predation. A challenge cost l Unknown l Unk. Predator share agreement between MDFWP, U.S. 1 Old Age Forest Service, and the USFWS outlines e methods to collect data on the impact on the Mt. Lion Wolf deer population by the Murphy Lake Pack. Bear UNNe Human Intensive radio-location data for both deer and wolves wiil be analyzed as the study 2 Bear progresses. 5 Wolf 1 Unknown 2 Human 1 Accident ll Sawtooth Pack Table 5. Mortality of radio-collared female white- @ long-term study was initiated by the ailed deer, elk and moose in the North Fork of the U.S. Forest Service Rocky Mountain Ranger Flathead River drainage, 1990-1993. District and the USFWS in cooperation with MDFWP with the Forest Service taking the Wolves selected white-tailed deer as their lead. The objectives are to determine the pack primary prey (Table 6) and tended to travel and dynamics, food habits, movement patterns and kill deer in areas of greatest deer density. wolf/human/livestock interactions. The pack is being monitored by the Forest Service with A mountain lion ecology study has been assistance from MDFWP and the private initiated on the North Fork. This study is being landowners in the area. conducted by personnel from the Hornocker Wildlife Research Institute, and has already On April 17, the Sawtooth pack documented some direct and indirect food established a den in prairie grassiand on private competition between lions and wolves. Some of property with the rendezvous sites being within a the predation rates by lions on ungulates is mile of the den, also on private property. The depicted in Table 6. pasture with the den site contained 515 cow/calf pairs from late April to late May. The first A Master's thesis by Meg Langley completed in 1993 examined habitat selection, sabia mortality, and populations Cause Prey of moose from 1990-1992. ; | Interactions with wolves white tail deer included 1 moose (out of 4 ane moose mortalitias) killed by sn wolves. | : , lion white tail deer elk Murphy Lake starvation white tail deer The unknown white tail deer Department of Fish, TOTAL po har — Table 6. Causes of mortality in ungulates within the North Fork of the population ecology stucty in Flathead River drainage for December 1992-March 1993, and rendezvous site was in a pasture with 200-515 INFORMATION AND EDUCATION cow-Ccalf pairs from June 1 to July 20. Wolves were observed 3 times from 20 to 400 meters Buring 1993, approximately 49 from cattle during this period. At no time during presentations were made to 1,542 people about these observations did wolves display any wolf natural history and the Montana wolf interest in the cattle, nor did the cattle appear to recovery program. Meetings and contacts with avoid the wolves. The wolves were observed 18 federal and state agencies, conservation times within 400-800 meters from January to organizations, sportsman's groups, and the June. media occurred on a regular basis. Attempts were made to respond to the public’s concerns Other Research about wolves by answering questions, giving presentations, distributing literature and reports, Three University of Montana graduate and continual communication with all interested students are in the early stages of initiating parties regardless of their view of wolves. Public research projects that relate directly to wolf understanding and tolerance, if not acceptance, recovery in Montana. Mike Jimenez is studying is one of the keys to successful wolf recovery. wolf movements and responses relative to human activities including roads and livestock in WOLF/LIVESTOCK INTERACTIONS the Ninemile Valley. Diane Boyd will be investigating wolf dispersal patterns in southern Wolf Management Specialist, Carter British Columbia and Alberta, and Montana and Niemeyer, with USDA Animal Damage Control, examining the genetic lineages of the adjacent investigated 10 reports of wolf depredation on Canadian and Montana wolf populations. Wendy livestock during 1993 (Table 7). None of the Arjo will be studying wolf/coyote interactions in reports were confirmed as wolf depredation. the North Fork of the Flathead River drainage. Since pack establishement in Montana in 1986, 1987 1989 1991 1991 1992 1993 Babb Marion Nine Mile Heart Butte Nine Mile wu MT Date ist 5/8/87 8/31/89 3/29/91 §/23/91 5/16/92 none Oepredat ion Wolves Involved 7 ; . 1 3 1 Wolves Controlled 6 & Control Method 4 trap 3 trap aerial gun aerial dart aerial dart 2 aerial gun 1 aerial dart Fate of Wolves 4 killed translocated killed translocated captivity 2 captivity Possible Livestock eve 9 \lemb 1 sheep 0 sheep sheep 0 Lambs G losses cows 2 calif 1 cows 2 calves 8 calves steers 2 cattle 0 steers 3 Confirmed Loses ewe 9 \eab 1 Lambs 2 co2w csalf 1 steers3 Cost Control* $41,000 $3,049 Amount $3,069 Compensated*** Contre: Deys 125 Other Losses 6 flonths After Control “Includes ell selery, travel, equipment purchases, services **includes confirmed losses, possible losses, and losses after control “**pefenders of Wildlife Program - 100% compensation for confirmed and 50% for possible losses Table 7. Summary of wolf depredation and control in Montana, 1980-1993. livestock losses have totaled 17 cattle and 12 comments were received on the draft, the largest sheep and $11,500 of compensation payments number of comments ever received on a federal have been paid to producers (Table 7). The EIS. The contents of those comments were investigations of reported depredations, and analyzed, and the final EIS is being arnended to awareness by agencies and the public that reflect those commenis. possible depredations will be investigated in a prompt and objective manner, has contributed to Because the experimental population wolf recovery by allaying concerns that “nothing areas would extend into Montana (Fig. 3) the will be done”, and by determining how the proposed action would affect the way wolves are livestock died before rumors about wolf managed in portions of Montana. Full depredations get out of control. This aspect of implementation of the proposal would result in wolf management remains an essential part of wolves in essentially the southern half of the wolf recovery program in Montana. Montana being managed as members of one of two experimental populations. No packs of ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT (EIS) wolves are known to exist in these areas, but a few lone wolves could be present. Wolves in The draft EIS for the reintroduction of areas where packs now exist would continue to gray wolves to Yellowstone National Park and be managed as a non-experimental, naturally central idaho was approved on June 8, 1993. occurring population having all the protections of The draft EIS described 5 alternatives, with the the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as prefered alternative being a reintroduction of amended. wolves designated as nonessential/experimental SUMMARY to both areas. Approximately 160,000 Wolf recovery is steadily progressing through natural recolonization in Montana. At years’ end, 5 known packs were living in the State, including 3 outside Glacier National Park (Fig. 2). Two additional packs have territories that straddle the international boundary with Canada. One of the packs was formed when a yearling female (Wolf 9270) dispersed from the North Camas Pack in January, 1992, to the Belly River area on the east side of WI Waterton and Glacier National Parks. This wolf was observed with 4 other wolves in late 1993. Movements of Wolf 1718 in the Thompson River area are being carefully monitored with hopes that a new pack may be forming. The general belief among biologists is that several positive factors point toward more rapid Wildlife Biologist wolf recovery in the near future: 1) the North Fork Salish and Kootenai Tribes P.O. Box 278 wolves have probably reached their maximum Pablo, MT 59855 pack size, which should mean increased dispersal, 2) as the wolf population increases in Dan Carney Montana and immediate surrounding area, the Wildlife Biologist biological potential for continued increase is Blackfeet Nation Box 850 enhanced, 3) public awareness as a result of Browning, MT 59417 information and education programs has increased, resulting in the public being generally Tad Day supportive of wolf recovery and wolves in Wildlife Biologist U.S. Bureau of Land Management general, and 4) a quick and balanced approach P.O. Drawer 2865 to concerns by the public has gone far towards Great Falls, MT 59403-2865 convincing people that the “government” does care and wolf problems and conflicts will be Carter Neimeyer addressed. Biologically, wolf recovery is clearly Wolf Management Specialist A.P.H.1.S. Animal Damage Control on track. However, illegal human-caused Box 982 mortality, which no doubt has been amplified by East Helena, MT 59635 misinformation about the wolf, remains a major concern. Presently wolf recovery includes Jim Claar identifying strategies for wolf management, since Special Projects Biologist public acceptance and/or tolerance based on Northern Region, U.S. Forest Service P.O. Box 7669 correct information will be critical for attaining Missoula, MT 59801 recovery goals and removing the wolf from the endangered species list. Barry Paulsen Forest Biologist MONWOTLF AWORKNING AGR OUP Helena Nationai Forest 2880 Skyway Dr. Joe Fontaine Helena, MT 59626 MT Wolf RecoPrvojeectr Leyad er U.S. Fish and Wiidlife Service Don Godtel 100 N Park, Suite 320 Forest Biologist HeleMnTa 59,60 1 Lewis and Clark National Forest 1101 15th St N Jim Till Great Falis, MT 59403 Wildlife Biologist U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Mike Hillis 780 Creston Hatchery Ri Forest Biologist CrestMoT n59,90 1 Lolo National Forest Bidg. 24, Fort Missoula Dr. Steven Fritts Missoula, MT 59901 NorWtolfh Recwoverey Csoordtina tor U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Bob Summertield 100 N Park, Suite 320 Forest Biologist HelenMTa 59,60 1 Kootenai National Forest 506 U.S. Highway 2 West Libby, MT 59923