< Back

In addition to the above-stated purpose, the agencies have agreed that nine objectives would guide them in determining whether an alternative is reasonable, and in selecting the preferred alternative. Each alternative must meet the following objectives:

1. Address bison population size and distribution; have specific commitments relating to size of bison herd.
2. Clearly define a boundary line beyond which bison will not be tolerated.
3. Address the risk to public safety and private property damage by bison.
4. Commit to the eventual elimination of brucellosis in bison and other wildlife.
5. Protect livestock from the risk of brucellosis.
6. Protect the state of Montana from risk of reduction in its brucellosis status.
7. At a minimum, maintain a viable population of wild bison in YellowstoneNational Park, as defined in biological, genetic, and ecological terms.
8. Be based on factual information, with the recognition that the scientific database is changing.
9. Recognize the need for coordination in the management of natural and cultural resource values that are the responsibility of the signatory agencies.

Another important factor in deciding the reasonableness of alternatives are agency constraints imposed by laws, regulations, or other requirements. All alternatives must be within these constraints to be a viable choice. A summary of legislative and regulatory requirements of each of the four agencies involved in bison management is provided in volume 1, “Purpose of and Need for Action.”