"the total proportion of farms in wolf range that suffer verified wolf depredations is only about 1% per year"(623)

"All but 3 of the 11 farm characteristics and management practices we assessed were similar for chronic and matching (non-depredated) farms, with one factor being equivocal (Tables 1-4). The 3 factors that differed were size of farm, number of livestock, and distance of livestock from human dwelling, and these factors were correlated (r2=0.09-0.37, P=0.001-0.05). The chronic farms were larger (491 vs. 292+/- 71 ha), had more cattle (158 vs. 82+/- 18), and had herds farther (mean maximum distance =2.8 km vs. 1.8+/- 0.5 km) from human dwellings (Table 1)."(626-627)

"The equivocal factor was method of carcass disposal. Contrary to expectations, more farms with chronic losses reported properly disposing of carcasses than did matching farms not suffering cattle depredations (Table 5). However, WS personnel indicated that they had observed evidence of at least an intermittent carcass dump on all except 2 of the 41 farms with chronic losses."(627)

"Larger farms and herds also may have had less human presence. Conceivably, farm size itself was a neutral factor, but some unknown factor related to farm size was causative."(628)

"false reporting about livestock carcass disposal also may have been a problem with chronic farms. This interpretation is supported by the disparity between interview results from farmers suffering chronic losses and the recollections of WS personnel. This disparity may be due to the different periods covered by the 2 types of data collection. Our survey covered only 1998, whereas the recollections of WS personnel spanned a decade or more. Perhaps some chronic farms had carcass dumps prior to 1998 but no longer have them. Potentially all these factors were operating."(628)

"One possible explanation is that because matching farms held fewer cattle, they may have sustained fewer general losses and thus had fewer carcasses available."(629)