McLEOD, Mont. - Barbed wire used to be the only thing keeping Emma Ellison's cows from the Baker Mountain wolf pack.

This spring, there's a stiffer line of defense: electrified wire draped with red strips of flagging.

"It you touch your nose on it, it'll get your attention," said Brian Finnan, Ellison's friend and neighbor who helps keep an eye on the place.

The fencing went up last month around a 40-acre pasture as an experiment to see how well it works at keeping hungry wolves from cows and calves.

Wolves are suspected of killing a few cows on the ranch two years ago, but it was never officially confirmed. Still, the mere presence of wolves nearby was enough to give the electrified fencing and flagging a try.

The strips of red material - called fladry - exploit a quirk in wolves' personality that steers them away from new, unfamiliar objects. The 7,000 volts pulsing through the wires, in a souped-up version called "turbo-fladry," add a body-jarring jolt to those bold enough to test it.

"If it's going to reduce depredations, great," said Finnan, after walking through ankle-deep mud and snow to open the pasture's gate. "Is it working? I don't know yet."

Wolves are smart, persistent and constantly on the lookout for food. With more than 1,300 in Montana, Idaho and Wyoming, the population continues to bump against places where people live and raise livestock.

Last year, 32 cows, four sheep, four dogs and two llamas were confirmed killed by wolves in Montana. In response, 53 wolves were killed.

But more and more, wolf biologists, ranchers and environmental groups have been pushing less-deadly methods to help ensure the survival of both wolves and livestock.

"Now that these predators are back, we've had to re-evaluate how we ranch in the West," said Jon Trapp, a wolf biologist for Fish, Wildlife and Parks. "Just as we learned to protect hay from elk and beehives from bears, we hope to find methods to minimize wolf-livestock conflict."

Easy answers are hard to come by.

Options include specialized fencing like the kind used at Ellison's ranch as well as guard dogs, noise makers, range riders to keep an eye on livestock, and guns that shoot noise-making "cracker" shells or rubber bullets.

Circumstances are different at every ranch, so there's no one-size-fits-all approach and each method has its limits.

"They've all worked and they've all failed at different times," Trapp said.

Not far down the road from Ellison's place, Keith and Marie Engle have agreed to use range riders to patrol their cattle herds and try to cut down on problems with wolves. The program is being funded by the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Natural Resources Conservation Service and an environmental group, Predator Conservation Alliance.

The Engles used to have a sheep operation but had to give it up.

"We couldn't compete with the predators," Keith Engle said.

He estimated wolves have caused $10,000 to $12,000 in livestock losses in their area.

"They can come in and do quite a lot of damage in a short period of time," he said. "We felt we needed to do something."

Several days earlier, the range riders spotted three sets of wolf tracks in the area. Engle, who is no fan of wolves, said the riders may help cut down on some of the problems but said overall he doubts the effectives of nonlethal methods, calling them a "Band-Aid approach."

"They're smart," he said of the wolves. "I just don't think it's going to be effective."

A 160-acre pasture at the Engles' place has also been surrounded by the experimental electrified fence and flagging.

Nathan Lance, a graduate student at Utah State University, is conducting the experiments, including some south of Big Timber and others near Arlee.

Last year in Minnesota, Lance tested the technology on wolves in captivity and quickly found that electrified fladry was effective for longer than just hanging flags on a wire.

Testing it in the field is a different matter. He estimated it costs about $3,500 to fence a 40-acre pasture with the turbo-fladry and $5,500 to $6,000 for a 160-acre area. It's probably going to work best in calving areas or places where the enclosed area is relatively small, he said.

Like other techniques, it may work well in some places but not be applicable in others, he said.

"The ultimate measure comes down to, is there a depredation or not?" Lance said.

The only guaranteed method of eliminating wolf-killed livestock is to get rid of all wolves or to take away all of the livestock, said Ed Bangs, wolf recovery coordinator for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

"Any time you mix livestock and predators, there's going to be a loss," Bangs said.

But societies around the world have learned to cope, whether it's cattle in Africa or sheep and goats in Mongolia, Bangs said. The question is how much time and money needs to be spent to protect from potential losses.

"It boils down to economic and feasibility issues," he said.

For most ranchers in the state, wolves aren't a major problem. Statistics compiled by the U.S. Department of Agriculture, which are less precise than those produced by state wolf officials, estimate that 200 sheep were killed by wolves last year. By comparison, coyotes killed more than 10,000 sheep, eagles killed 1,100, foxes killed 700 and dogs got 600, according to the statistics.

But those ranchers who are hit, such as Vern and Averill Keller, often have repeated problems.

The Kellers' ranch at Fishtail has been a hot spot for wolf depredations since the early days after wolves were reintroduced to Yellowstone National Park in 1995 and 1996.

They lost 23 lambs in a single night several years ago.

"Even when we had herders with them, the wolf came in at night and slaughtered them," Averill Keller said. "They were just scattered all over."

Over the years, they've accepted, reluctantly at first, compensation payments from Defenders of Wildlife, an environmental group that pays ranchers for confirmed wolf losses.

More recently, an electrified pen has been erected at their place; they move their sheep in each night and release them in the morning. They've seen wolf tracks outside the pen but, so far, haven't had any sheep killed inside.

That's progress, she said, but it's another extra chore to move the sheep in and out every night and morning.

"It gets to be a real headache," she said.

The Kellers have ranched in the presence of coyotes and bears for years, but she said wolves are different, more aggressive. And, simply put, losing sheep to wolves or other predators means losing money, which pushes ranches closer to the brink and increases the likelihood that the land will be sold and subdivided, she said.

"People don't understand. This is our livelihood," Keller said.

Jael Kampfe's family has been ranching at the Lazy EL Ranch near Roscoe for four generations. They see wolves and wolf tracks regularly but haven't yet had a confirmed livestock kill.

"We've been living with them for years," said Kampfe during a break from worming their horses.

Last August, in a program funded by Defenders of Wildlife, two range riders began working with their cattle herd and checking every day for signs of predators. It's a good chance to test how well range riders, and other non-lethal methods, work.

"We need to know what's effective," she said.

But there's a larger context, too. Many ranchers are still stinging from the reintroduction of wolves and there's still no government-funded program to make sure the losses, brought about by a government-run introduction of wolves, are paid for, she said.

People need to recognize the value of open land that ranches provide and understand that wolves, both through direct losses and costly efforts to keep them at bay, only make it more difficult, she said.

"If there's a desire to have wolves, we have to have a financial plan to make it feasible," Kampfe said.

Part of that debate has been happening in the Montana Legislature this year after word that wolves in the Northern Rockies may come off the endangered species list sometime next year.

The House and Senate recently approved House Bill 364, which would set up a state fund to pay for livestock losses and for mitigation measures.

Ultimately, the friction between wolves and livestock will be dealt with through a mixture of lethal and non-lethal methods, wolf biologists said. It will be messy and complicated in some places, and easier in others.

Landowners already have the authority to shoot and kill wolves that are harassing or killing livestock. Researching other methods that work should be better for everyone, Trapp said.

Back at Ellison's place, the cows and calves seem relaxed in the fenced-in pasture. Those who look after them, though, know they can't let their guard down.

"I wouldn't say they've accepted wolves," Finnan said of area ranchers. "But I'd say they've accepted that wolves are here."