For Recent Grizzly Bear News: Carnivora- Grizzly Bear News
Return To Home Page--The American Grizzly Bear
Return To Carnivora - Grizzly Bears
Please Note: The purpose of this page is not to provide
detailed coverage of all the most recent grizzly
bear news, just some of what I think is important. My
comments, if any, on any story posted will appear at the end of the story (unless I wrote
the story) and will be preceded by: *
Note.
May 24, 2003
From the Great Falls Tribune
Saturday, May 24, 2003
By SONJA LEE
Tribune Staff Writer
The grizzly bear mother and three yearlings, which traveled more than 200 miles before being captured and forced to hibernate earlier in the year, are moving around their home range and staying out of trouble.
"She looks like she is gaining weight and her three yearlings are gaining weight too," said Mike Madel, a grizzly bear management specialist with Montana Fish, Wildlife & Parks.
In early April, the wounded, wandering grizzly mother and three yearlings were released from a makeshift den, where the four had spent only about six weeks.
The mother bear, Bear No. 144, was wounded Nov. 19 after charging a Missoula hunter and being shot in the head. The family then made a three-month and more than 200-mile trek through the backcountry before being captured and forced to hibernate.
Between November and February, the bears meandered as far south as the south fork of the Teton River, north into the Badger-Two Medicine area and out onto the prairie ranchlands of the Blackfeet Indian Reservation.
The 17Þ-year-old mother has been reclusive, nocturnal and observed on only a few occasions, Madel said. The bear's eyesight and senses seem to be fine.
"When you see her, you can't tell from her movements or actions that she has been wounded," Madel said. "We just hope it continues."
The bear continues to be in its home range west of Dupuyer. Like other bears, it occasionally crosses onto private ground, Madel said. Wildlife biologists are working to keep all property owners aware of the bear's movements on private ground.
May 19, 2003
In Yellowstone, It's a Carnivore Competition
By Guy Gugliotta
Washington Post Staff Writer
Monday, May 19, 2003; Page A07
It was not a fair fight. The wolverine may have been as nasty as any predator in the mountains, but it weighed only 27 pounds. The black bear had arisen from a long winter's sleep and was almost certainly very hungry. The slain elk, carrying as much as 550 pounds of meat, was a prize worth fighting for.
"We don't know how it unfolded, except that the wolverine lost," said wolverine expert Kristine Inman, of the Wildlife Conservation Society. There were a few elk hairs on the ground and signs the bear had carried the elk away. The wolverine carcass was "intact," albeit with a crushed head and bear bites all over its body.
This encounter occurred April 22, an unusual example of predator killing predator in the remote reaches of greater Yellowstone Park, a 40,600-square-mile tract of wilderness spreading like an ink blot across the junction of Wyoming, Montana and Idaho.
But while the wolverine may have chosen a mismatch bordering on madness, scientists say that predators killing one another is probably part of the natural order of things, and greater Yellowstone is offering an unprecedented opportunity to test the theory.
With the reintroduction of the gray wolf in 1995, the park and its suburbs now have a full complement of North America's great carnivores: wolves, grizzly bears, black bears, cougars, coyotes and wolverines. Nowhere else on the continent can boast such variety.
And all the species, with the exception of coyotes, are prospering, either protected under the Endangered Species Act or by hunting or trapping restrictions. The Northern Rockies coyote population, which had the run of the park after wolves were exterminated in the 1930s, has been halved to 225 animals since the wolves returned.
"Things are starting to sort themselves out," said coyote specialist Robert Crabtree, of the Yellowstone Ecological Research Center. "When there are wolves and coyotes, there are always going to be kills of coyotes."
And evidence is growing that other species are fighting and dying as well. When meat-eaters have plenty to eat -- and there are about 14,000 elk in greater Yellowstone, the densest population on the continent -- they spend considerable time pushing one another around like bullies on a playground.
"It's a toothy world out there," said the U.S. Geological Survey's Chuck Schwartz, leader of greater Yellowstone's Interagency Grizzly Bear Study Team. "It is probably very normal in a multi-predator, multi-prey system for predators to compete for a carcass. It's all about numbers and size."
The male grizzly, 7 feet tall and weighing close to 1,000 pounds, "is the king of beasts, but they're slow," said Douglas Smith, who leads the National Park Service's Yellowstone Wolf Project. Next in the pecking order, albeit with some disagreement, come the wolves, the only predators who work in a team, followed by black bears, cougars, coyotes and smaller carnivores such as the wolverine.
The bears and the wolves can comfortably bring down an adult male elk. The cougar is a solitary hunter and prefers elk calves, but it can kill adults as well. Coyotes and smaller animals either have to scavenge other animals' elk kills or settle for mouthful-sized voles, squirrels, mice and other rodents.
An elk is a temptation that wolverines, and especially coyotes, can't resist: "If you can survive long enough to cash in on a big food source like an elk, you can eat well, produce pups and pass on your genes," Crabtree said. "But you have to avoid the wolves. If you don't, you die."
In the wolverine's case, the competitor was a black bear. Inman said it was not clear whether the bear or the wolverine killed the elk -- wolverines have been known to pull it off -- or whether the elk had simply thawed out after freezing to death or dying of starvation during the winter. However it happened, the pecking order prevailed.
No matter which carnivore kills the elk, researchers agree that greater Yellowstone is a ruthless place where losers often pay the ultimate price. Last month, 14 wolves caught a female cougar out in the open skulking around one of their kills. The wolves killed the cougar, then found her kittens and killed them. The dead female had wolf hair in her teeth and claws.
"The wolves will wade into a situation and check it out, and if it goes well, they'll keep going," Smith said. Sometimes it works, but sometimes it does not. Smith saw a male grizzly drive a pack of wolves away from an elk carcass, then make a "king of the hill" defense as the wolves darted in and out, trying, but failing, to wear him out.
But wolves do not always win. Males, at 125 pounds, can go after a 110-pound female cougar if they are in a pack, but a lone wolf is a bagatelle for a 160-pound male cougar. Smith has recorded two instances of cougars ambushing and killing single wolves -- one an adult, the other a pup.
"A lion has two sets of lethal weapons -- teeth and claws, whereas wolves' principal weapon is just teeth," said National Park Service cougar specialist Kerry Murphy. Cougars can dominate as long as they stay in the rocks or in the forest, where they can climb a tree. "We're still talking about dogs and cats," he said.
The wolves have had remarkable success since their return to Yellowstone, growing from an initial infusion of 37 animals to 273 today, in 31 separate packs. Still, Smith acknowledges, a female grizzly "is the single most dangerous animal in the mountains."
This is because bears, like some of the other predators, have more to fear from their own kind than they do from neighbors. Male bears will kill and eat a female's newborn cubs, perhaps to accelerate the female's breeding cycle. Male cougars will also kill a female's cubs and will take on another male if it tries to usurp its breeding rights.
Among wolves, killing one another is "part of the natural order of things," Smith said. "Wolves are ferociously territorial," he added, and are constantly fighting turf wars. Since the wolves returned to greater Yellowstone, there have been at least 30 pack conflicts, with 15 wolves killed, he said.
Crabtree suggested that these battles are one reason wolves sometimes let coyotes approach their kills, then chase them down, even though they represent no danger: "Maybe you want to teach your pups tricks of the trade," he said. "Maybe wolves are killing coyotes to practice for conflicts with other wolves later in life."
© 2003 The Washington Post Company
March 18, 2003
Bush Shows No Fear in Grizzly Territory
White House Takes On Popular Icon With Mining Plan
Blaine Harden
Washington Post Staff Writer
Sunday, May 18, 2003; Page A01 SEATTLE -- Grizzlies are long-serving superstars of
the environmental
movement.
Since they came under the protection of the Endangered Species Act in 1975, the hirsute,
meat-eating beasts -- "charismatic megafauna" in the activist argot -- have
helped raise money and motivate voters for environmental causes.
"They are our big guns for mobilizing people and protecting places," said Tracy
Stone-Manning, executive director of the Clark Fork Coalition, a conservation group in
western Montana's bear country. "They represent all that is wild. You know, they can
eat you."
Now, the Bush administration -- more than any White House in the past 28 years -- has been
willing to take on the charisma of the big bears. The administration has made land-use
decisions that it describes as sensible and scientifically based while largely ignoring
howls from environmental groups about how those actions will harm Ursus arctos
horribilis.
As a consequence, a painstakingly won consensus among federal experts and
environmentalists about what is needed to protect grizzlies is breaking down. Some federal
wildlife managers concede that, when it comes to grizzlies, no one trusts them anymore.
The latest episode came last week in a federally designated wilderness in Montana. The
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service ruled that a proposed silver and copper mine that would
tunnel beneath the Cabinet Mountain Wilderness would not harm a small and vulnerable
cluster of grizzlies, as long as precautions are taken.
If the Rock Creek Mine goes ahead -- environmental groups said they will sue to prevent
construction -- it would be the first major mining project allowed beneath a wilderness
area.
As notable, for an administration led by a man named Bush, is the provenance of some of
the bears in the Cabinet wilderness. Four of them (three might still be alive) were
imported from Canada as the result of an unprecedented grizzly-friendly decision made by
the first Bush administration.
"In the early 1990s, under the first George Bush, we were the first place in the
United States to bring in non-problem bears to augment an existing population," said
Wayne Kasworm, a primary researcher of bears in the Cabinet wilderness for the Fish and
Wildlife Service. "At the time, it was a very controversial move in northwest
Montana."
Four female grizzlies were brought south from Canada in the hope that they would breed
with a dwindling group of 30 to 40 bears that were considered to be at far higher risk of
extinction than the relatively large and robust bear populations around Yellowstone and
Glacier national parks.
The bears in the Cabinet Mountains are still at high risk of extinction, according to the
Fish and Wildlife Service. But in its decision last week, the service said it would be
able to mitigate the bear-threatening effects of the proposed 10,000-tons-per-day mine.
The mine, expected to operate for as long as 35 years, would bring much more traffic to
mountain roads, increasing the risk that bears would be hit by trucks or killed by
poachers. The government would require the mining company, the Sterling Mining Co. of
Spokane, Wash., to hire two bear managers, improve sanitation and acquire 2,400 acres of
private land for bears. Sterling has said it has not yet decided whether to build the
mine.
In explaining what he called a "very difficult decision," Ralph Morgenweck,
regional director of the Fish and Wildlife Service, said the mine and the mitigation plan
"will not substantially degrade the baseline habitat conditions for bears and will
provide some beneficial effects."
Environmentalists and a number of grizzly researchers argued that the mitigation would be
insufficient. They insisted that the grizzly population in the Cabinet Mountains is
already so close to extinction that it would be reckless to introduce more people and more
traffic.
"The whole thing appears to be driven far more by what is politically acceptable to
the administration than by science," said Lee H. Metzgar, a bear population expert
and retired director of wildlife biology at the University of Montana in Missoula.
"In my view, the grizzly population in the Cabinet region is being managed for
extinction."
A chorus of environmental groups said the Bush administration seems more interested in
getting minerals out of the ground than in protecting endangered bears. Stone-Manning,
director of the Clark Fork Coalition in Missoula, said the White House has been
surprisingly confrontational when it comes to grizzlies.
"This is an ideological battleground for them," Stone-Manning said. "They
are going after the charismatic megafauna."
Two federal officials, speaking on condition of anonymity, agreed that the grizzly issue
has become highly politicized under the present Bush administration, opening it to
unnecessary criticism even when its decisions are based on sound science.
"It has given the environmentalist movement great ammunition to say that every
federal decision about grizzly management is based on political trickery, which is
certainly not the case," said one official, who holds a senior management position in
the federal effort to protect the bears.
Most of that ammunition comes from a decision two years ago by Interior Secretary Gale A.
Norton. She halted a Clinton-era plan to reintroduce grizzlies into a wilderness area in
central Idaho.
The plan, six years in the making before it was scuttled, had won the support of timber
companies and organized labor, and it was enthusiastically embraced by bear experts at the
Fish and Wildlife Service.
Some of those experts had worked on the bear-relocation plan that, under the first Bush
administration, imported Canadian grizzlies to the Cabinet wilderness -- where the current
Bush administration last week approved the silver mine.
There were solid scientific reasons behind the plan to reintroduce grizzlies in central
Idaho. Scientists wanted to create a travel corridor that would connect -- and enrich the
genetic diversity of -- grizzly concentrations in Glacier and Yellowstone.
But the Republican governor of Idaho, Dirk Kempthorne, sued to stop the plan. He denounced
the Clinton administration for trying to force "massive, flesh-eating
carnivores" into his state.
Norton said she shelved the grizzly-relocation scheme to ensure "the support of the
states, local communities and all interested stakeholders." But the move was widely
interpreted in the West as a political payback to Kempthorne for his support in electing
Bush.
Since Norton's decision, some federal officials involved in grizzly recovery say they have
lost credibility in the scientific community.
This year, for example, the federal government announced plans to begin removing some
groups of grizzlies from the endangered species list. There is solid evidence, for
example, that the 400 to 600 grizzlies in the Yellowstone ecosystem are healthy and
expanding their territory.
But the move to delist some grizzlies has been met with denunciations from many major
environmental groups.
"Because of Secretary Norton's decision to manage grizzlies based on politics,
instead of science, all actions by the Bush administration need to be given a lot of
scrutiny," said Bart Semcer, the Sierra Club's senior staff member in Washington for
wildlife issues.
With a breakdown in the federal-environmental consensus on how to protect grizzlies, there
is increasing concern among bear biologists for the peaceful coexistence of the big bears
with the humans who increasingly live among them. There has been rapid population growth
in the Rocky Mountain West, with thousands of new homes being built in prime bear habitat.
Some federal officials fear that anti-grizzly sentiment could spread, if political rancor
over the bears continues to increase.
"The future of grizzly bears is going to be built on the hearts and minds of the
people who live here," said Chris Servheen, who for 22 years has been in charge of
grizzly recovery for the Fish and Wildlife Service.
Environmentalists such as Stone-Manning agree. She said that "us against them"
confrontations risk alienating the very citizens whom environmentalists need to win over
-- and could reduce the chances of grizzly survival.
April 3, 2003
Grizzlies need their space, too, says report
CALGARY -- Environmentalists want the federal government to permanently
close
areas, limit hikers and prohibit vehicles in some parts of Banff National Park to ensure
grizzly bear survival.
A report called The Bear Necessities says seven of Banff's 60 grizzly bears were killed in
the last two years. Most were hit by vehicles or trains.
The animals won't be around in the future if humans don't relinquish some land for
habitat, said Tracey Henderson, program director for the Bow Valley Grizzly Bear Alliance.
"What it really comes down to is, as a society, we need to decide if we want grizzly
bears on our landscape in the long term," Henderson said as they released a strategy
for grizzly bear conservation in the park. "And, if we do, there are some bold
decisions and sacrifices that are going to have to be made. We just have too many people
within key grizzly bear habitats."
Roaming the heavily developed Banff corridor to find food and mates has taken a toll on
grizzly bears, Henderson said. The area is visited by five million people annually.
David Ellenberger
Sierra Club Lewis & Clark Campaign
Media & Outreach Coordinator
P.O. Box 1290
Bozeman, MT 59771-1290
October 25, 2001
The Billings Gazette reported that Dr. Frank Craighead, Jr. died October 21 in Jackson,
Wyoming at the age of 85. From the Gazette story: "At a time when the animal was seen
only as a threat and a nuisance, the Craigheads championed the bear and showed through
detailed scientific research the importance of the grizzly in the Yellowstone
ecosystem."
Dr. John Craighead is Frank’s twin brother. They studied grizzlies in Yellowstone together for about ten years beginning in the late 1950s. Frank Craighead's "Track of the Grizzly" was the first grizzly bear book I ever read. Frank founded a research institute in 1955, called the Craighead Environmental Research Institute (CERI) today and headed by Frank's son, Dr. Lance Craighead. Lance is the author of a recent book called Bears of the World.
Frank also wrote a book called For Everything There is a Season, The Sequence of Natural Events in the Grand Teton-Yellowstone Area. Here is an excerpt:
October 16-21
Occasional storms temporarily blanket the area with snow, causing grizzly bears to move to den sites or to previously prepared hibernation dens. Some black bears will already have hibernated. Ice forming on ponds and streams alters concentration of waterfowl, moving them to faster water. Migrant ducks and geese fly in from the north, their stay temporary before they wing their way farther south.
October 23, 2001: For Immediate Release:
Contact: Chris Genovali 250-655-1229 or Ian McAllister 250-881-2235
GRIZZLY BEAR HUNT PANEL IN CHAOS: CHAIR RESIGNING BEFORE FIRST MEETING
Raincoast’s Ian McAllister to give slide show on grizzly hunt issue in
Vancouver Wednesday October 24th
VICTORIA, BRITISH COLUMBIA – Raincoast Conservation Society has learned that
Dr. Fred Bunnell is resigning from the Liberal government appointed grizzly
bear hunt scientific panel for health reasons. Bunnell was to have served as
chair of the panel and was the only Canadian scientist on the panel. The
“independent” science panel was struck by Joyce Murray, Minister of
Water,
Land, and Air Protection when the Liberals overturned the grizzly hunt
moratorium. Despite pledging that her ministry will “ensure openness and
accountability in all our decisions,” the science panel was hand picked
behind closed doors with no opportunity for public input.
By the looks of it this panel process is in chaos with no chair, no
Canadian members and inadequate terms of reference. In addition, the panel
appears stacked with pro-grizzly hunting Americans who are going to be
unwilling to rock the boat in British Columbia,” said Chris Genovali of
Raincoast.
“Murray stated to Raincoast in a meeting on July 12 that she will not commit
to implementing any of the panel’s recommendations and has admitted to the
media that the panel’s mandate is to essentially rubber stamp the
government’s existing research. Combine that with the fact the panel won’t
be submitting its final report until December of 2002 while the hunt has
resumed in the fall of 2001, and it’s clear that the outcome of this entire
process has been predetermined,” said Raincoast’s Ian McAllister.
As part of Raincoast’s campaign to get the previous grizzly hunt moratorium
reinstated, Raincoast founder Ian McAllister will be giving a multi-media
slide show presentation in Vancouver on the plight of BC’s grizzly bears on
Wednesday October 24th at the Vancouver Public Library. The event, which is
being sponsored by SPEC, takes place at 7:30 PM. McAllister is co-author of
the award-winning book The Great Bear Rainforest: Canada’s Forgotten Coast .
His writing and photography has appeared in top nature magazines worldwide.
He and wife Karen were named as two “Leaders for the 21st Century” by Time
magazine
June 21, 2001
Plan to Reintroduce Grizzly Bears to the Bitterroot Ecosystem Is Halted
The proposal to reintroduce grizzly bears to the Bitterroot Ecosystem as a nonessential experimental population and allow a Citizen Management Committee to manage the bears was a bad one. In a June 20, 2001 press release, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service proposed to concentrate recovery efforts and resources on existing grizzly bear populations in the lower 48 states and to withdraw a plan to reintroduce grizzly bears into the Bitterroot ecosystem of Idaho and Montana.
Interior Secretary Gale A. Norton proposed rescinding the plan to reintroduce grizzly bears into the Bitterroot ecosystem of central Idaho and western Montana. She stopped a bad plan from being implemented but for the wrong reasons. Grizzlies belong in the Bitterroots, but not as non essential experimental status. They deserve all the protections of the Endangered Species Act. They also deserve to be managed by people who are interested in their recovery to a healthy state, not by political appointees recommended by a governor who opposes reintroduction in the first place.
Norton defended her decision by stressing she wants to focus on efforts to bolster existing grizzly bear populations, rather than start new ones.
Norton says, "The grizzlies deserve the best opportunities for their populations to thrive and prosper, and I am fully committed to the recovery of grizzly bears in the Lower 48." If that is true, she should move to reclassify the Selkirk, Cabinet-Yaak, and North Cascades grizzly bear populations as endangered. She should also stop the efforts to remove Endangered Species Act protection from the Yellowstone grizzly bear population.
A halt to reintroduce grizzlies to the Bitterroots was sought by Idaho Gov. Dirk Kempthorne, who sued the government to halt the reintroduction of what he called "massive, flesh-eating carnivores."
In November 2000, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service published a Record of Decision for a Final Environmental Impact Statement to reintroduce bears in the Bitterroot Ecosystem.
Fish and Wildlife is now reevaluating this Record of Decision and is proposing a "No Action" alternative. The public will have 60-days to comment on the proposal before a final decision is reached. If the No Action alternative is selected, grizzly bears would not be reintroduced into the Bitterroot ecosystem.
A Notice of Intent has been published in the Federal Register. It is in PDF format, which means you need Adobe Acrobat Reader to view the document. If you do not have it, it can be downloaded for free. Public comments are requested and will be accepted for 60 days after the Federal Register publication date. Comments should be sent to: Grizzly Bear Recovery Coordinator, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, P.O. Box 5127, Missoula, MT 59806 or electronically mailed to fw6_bitterroot@fws.gov.
The Proposed Rule to select the No Action Alternative as the Preferred Alternative is also available in PDF format.
Public comments are requested and will be accepted for 60 days after the Federal Register publication date. Comments should be sent to: Grizzly Bear Recovery Coordinator, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, P.O. Box 5127, Missoula, MT 59806 or electronically mailed to fw6_bitterroot@fws.gov.
April 9 2001
The Wyoming draft plan for managing grizzlies if their Endangered Species Act protections
are removed (delisted) is available online at: http://gf.state.wy.us/.
Although the plan will become part of the Conservation Strategy for the Grizzly Bear in
the Yellowstone Ecosystem, you will have to click on the "Hunting" page to get
to the Wyoming draft plan.
Comments can be submitted by email or in writing until July 20. Written comments mailed to:
Grizzly Bear Plan
Wyoming Game and Fish Department
5400 Bishop Blvd.,
Cheyenne, WY 82006
* Note Here is an excerpt that may justify having to go through the "Hunting" page to find Wyoming's plan for managing grizzlies:
"Individual nuisance bears deemed appropriate for removal may be taken by a sport hunter outside of National Parks in compliance with rules and regulations promulgated by the appropriate state wildlife agency commission, as long as such taking is in compliance with existing state and federal laws, and as long as mortality limits in the Conservation Strategy are not exceeded."
Soon, you may not have to travel all the way to Alaska to get that grizzly rug.
February 8, 2001
BC COALITION FOR
GRIZZLY CONSERVATION
For Immediate Release
GRIZZLY BEAR HUNT MORATORIUM
THE RIGHT THING TO DO
Coalition Applauds BC Government Decision
(Vancouver) – The BC Coalition for Grizzly
Conservation commends Premier Ujjal Dosanjh and the NDP government for placing a 3-year
moratorium on the sport hunting of BC’s grizzly bears.
“This is a great day for British Columbians and even a greater day for BC’s
grizzly bears,” said Chris Genovali of the Raincoast Conservation Society. “ A
moratorium will lead to increased certainty regarding the future of BC’s grizzly
bears. The Premier has clearly listened to the scientific community, the BC public
and to the province’s tourism industry.”
“This move will help secure the future of this wonderful animal, which is the very
symbol of the BC wild,” said Dr. Rick Smith, National Director for the International
Fund for Animal Welfare (IFAW). “It’s clear that an overwhelming majority
of British Columbians favour a halt to the Grizzly hunt and we are grateful to Premier
Dosanjh and the BC government for taking this principled decision.”
“This is a rare occasion when conservation and the precautionary approach have won
out over politics; future generations of British Columbians (and grizzlies) will thank the
Premier for it,” said Ian McAllister of the Raincoast Conservation Society.
The BC Coalition for Grizzly Conservation represents tens of thousands of British
Columbians, and has a membership of over 70 organizations, including First Nations,
tourism operators and conservation organizations. The Coalition has campaigned
hard for a moratorium on the grizzly hunt so that independent studies can be done to
ensure a reliable estimate of BC’s grizzly bears. In 1999, 68 professional
biologists submitted a strongly worded petition to government calling for a moratorium on
all grizzly bear hunting pending completion of comprehensive population studies in the
province's six bioregions. Wildlife scientists Dr. Brian Horejsi, Dr. Barrie Gilbert
and Dr. Lance Craighead stated, "Grizzly population estimates in BC have been
consistently over-estimated."
There is also strong support for grizzly bear conservation from the tourism sector.
Over 100 tourism operators from BC have called for an end to the hunt. One
eco-tourism operation, Knight Inlet Lodge on the central coast, generates more annual
revenue than all the guide outfitting associated with the grizzly bear hunt each year.
Dean Wyatt, owner of Knight Inlet Lodge, has said, "There is no economic
justification for the grizzly hunt. In fact, it pales in comparison to the tourism value
of saving the grizzly bear."
February 2, 2001
New Website Recently Added: Montana Fish, Wildlife & Parks Bear Identification Program -- This is a great website to test your ability to distinguish a black bear from a grizzly bear.
Comment by James Musgrove: Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks has been strongly "encouraged" by the Great Bear Foundation, Sierra Club Grizzly Bear Ecosystems Project, and others to take action to stop black bear hunters from killing grizzly bears. There is no guarantee that black bear hunters will visit the new Bear ID web site, take the exams or training, or pass the exams if they actually participate. However, that will not prevent them from getting a permit to hunt black bears.
What is really needed is a required training/certification program before a license to hunt black bears can be obtained. If grizzly bears continue to be killed by black bear hunters, look for stronger calls to eliminate black bear hunting in and around grizzly bear recovery areas and litigation to stop the illegal killing of grizzlies by black bear hunters.
December 9, 2000
2000 Is Deadly Year for Yellowstone Grizzlies -- by James Musgrove
The year 2000 has
been another deadly year for Yellowstone grizzly bears. The Montana
Department of Fish, Wildlife and Parks has reporte 33 confirmed grizzly bear deaths
in the Yellowstone area.
The Montana data indicate at least 23 of the mortalities were human-caused, with 16 deaths hunter-related, five killed by agency management actions. One grizzly death is still under investigation. One mortality was caused by a sheep rancher protecting his dog. Seven grizzlies reportedly died of natural causes. Two others are dead of unknown causes. Five yearling cubs were orphaned when their mothers were shot.
A poor
whitebark pine cone crop in 2000 likely caused grizzlies to look elsewhere to store the
fat they need to survive winter hibernation. Hunters contributed heavily to the most
lethal year in a long time for Yellowstone grizzlies.
In the lower forty-eight
states the American Grizzly Bear occupies less than 2 percent of the former range.
Only about 1,000 grizzlies remain in the U.S. south of Canada. Probably about 90
percent of those grizzly bears exist in the Yellowstone and the Northern Continental
Divide grizzly bear ecosystems. There are various estimates for the number of
grizzly bears living in the Yellowstone Grizzly Bear Ecosystem. The Grizzly Bear
Recovery Plan goal for limits on human-caused grizzly bear mortality is about 4 percent of
the estimated population with no more than 28 percent of the human-caused grizzly bear
mortalities being adult females.
Seventeen known human-caused
grizzly bear mortalities and one suspected were recorded in 1995 in the Yellowstone
Grizzly Bear Ecosystem. Seven of those were females.
Between September 15 and October 26, 1997, 8 grizzly bears were reportedly killed by hunters in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem. In response to a suggestion from a member of the Interagency Grizzly Bear Committee, the Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation has published a series of stories in a special section on grizzly bears in the September--October 1998 edition of their journal, Bugle. Issues of hunter safety and protection of grizzly bears are discussed, including the effectiveness of the use of pepper spray to the benefit of both grizzly and human. A story on the values associated with hunting in true wilderness--wild places "where grizzlies roam" is eloquently presented by Kevin Van Tighem, a wildlife biologist for Parks Canada. Dave Moody, of the Wyoming Game and Fish Department, urged hunters to carry pepper spray after the first 5 of these 8 grizzly bears were killed by hunters during a two-week period in September, including a female and her 3 offspring killed on September 15. Pepper spray is a non-lethal means of dealing with grizzly bear encounters. Pepper spray has not prevented injury in all situations but neither have firearms.
11/29/00: 20 Human-caused grizzly bear mortalities in NCDE
From the Northern Continental Divide Ecosystem (NCDE) Subcommittee Minutes
NOTE : NCDE is currently at 17 total known grizzly mortalities, including at least 9 females for 2000. This does not include a likely additional cub loss to a Middle Fork female killed in June, or 2 probable cub losses on the Blackfeet Reservation in October. These would mean we actually lost 20 grizzlies in 2000. Not counting those cub losses, the NCDE has still endured a known, human-caused loss of 88 grizzlies since 1995. At least 36 (41%) were females.
September 7, 2000
Production of Key Grizzly Bear Food Source Poor This Year In Yellowstone -- by James
Musgrove
In recent telephone conversations with the Interagency Grizzly Bear Study Team (IGBST) and the Bear Management Office in Yellowstone National Park I learned this is not a good year for whitebark pine cone production in the Yellowstone area. The seeds of whitebark pine cones are a key food source for Yellowstone grizzlies. When cone production is low, management actions against grizzlies and human-caused grizzly bear mortalities usually increase compared to years when cone production is high.
Red squirrels cache whitebark pine cones--In late summer and all grizzly bears frequently find the caches and consume the seeds. In years when the whitebark pine cone crop is poor, grizzlies have been known to search elsewhere for food, and the number of encounters between humans and grizzlies increases.
According to the IGBST, eighteen transects completed this year (2000) showed an average of 5.7 cones per tree. Data collected since 1980 indicate few management actions against grizzlies during the late summer and fall when cone production averages greater than 20 cones per tree. Last year cone production was high. Hopefully, grizzlies will be able to take advantage of the excess from last year and go to the den in good shape.
July 26, 2000
Sierra Club Press Release regarding the 25th anniversary of Endangered Species Act
Protedtion for the grizzly bear in the lower forty-eight states:
PRESS
RELEASE
July 26, 2000 & nbsp; &n bsp; David Ellenberger, Media & Outreach Coordinator, (406) 582-8365
For More
Information:
http://www.sierraclub.org/grizzly
(Bozeman,
MT) – The Sierra Club today marked the 25th anniversary of the listing
of grizzly bears as a threatened species by acknowledging the Endangered Species Act (ESA)
as the primary reason that the majestic wilderness species has survived rather than gone
extinct in the lower-48 United States.
“Thanks
to a strong ESA, people can still find grizzlies in the wilds of the northern
Rockies,” stated Louisa Willcox, project coordinator of the Sierra Club Grizzly Bear
Ecosystems Project. “Today, after 25
years of federal protection, we celebrate the protections of the Endangered Species Act
that have helped stabilize their populations in the lower-48, but we realize there is
still a long road ahead to a full recovery.” Willcox added that, “threats to
grizzlies have increased and intensified over the last 25 years. In addition to the
traditional threats from logging, oil and gas development, and mining, sprawl and off-road
vehicles are now also tearing up their habitat.”
Since the
listing of the grizzly in 1975, a total of 568,000 acres of roadless grizzly habitat in
the Northern Continental Divide Ecosystem (NCDE) have been lost to logging and roading. And the threats to grizzly bear habitat continue
unabated. For example, the Sierra Club and
Earthjustice Legal Defense Fund and other groups filed a recent lawsuit over the proposed
Double Cabin Timber Sale in the Shoshone National Forest. The timber sale would involve
clearcutting in a roadless area located directly outside the Washakie Wilderness Area in
the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem. The sale
area lies within occupied grizzly bear habitat and is inconsistent with President
Clinton’s Wild Forest Initiative to protect roadless National Forest lands. These and other conservation groups are also in
the midst of a lawsuit with the same National Forest to stop three proposed oil and gas
drilling operations nearby – also in occupied grizzly habitat.
This year alone, with the accidental shootings by black bear hunters, the NCDE has
exceeded the recovery planthreshold for allowable grizzly mortality levels for the fourth
consecutive year. In addition, six of the
total of nine dead bears lost to all causes were females - a devastating loss for a
species that doesn't breed until 5-6 years of age, and then only every third
year.
"Here
we are, just halfway through the year, and we've already exceeded the mortality cap for
female bears. We are supposed to be celebrating 25 years of ESA protections, but instead
we are watching in dismay as we lose increasing numbers of grizzlies to a few careless
hunters," said Brian Peck, a wildlife consultant for the Sierra Club's Grizzly Bear
Ecosystems Project. "That's 58 dead grizzly bears - that we know of - in this
ecosystem in the last 36 months. The state and federal governments are essentially
sanctioning a legal hunt that is resulting in an illegal ‘take’ of listed
grizzlies," he concluded.
At the same time the loss of grizzly
bear habitat is accelerating and killings are on the rise, the federal government is
taking steps to delist the Yellowstone grizzly, or remove its Endangered Species Act
protections. Last fall, the Interagency
Grizzly Bear Committee approved a plan to remove federal protections from the Yellowstone
grizzly by 2005.
“Not
only is removing the bear from the endangered species list premature and ill-advised at
this time, the federal plan falls far short of providing bears with what they need to
survive,” added Willcox. “The only
way to save grizzlies is to safeguard their habitat.
If we fail to save the lands they rely on from developers and extractive
industries, we will lose one of the nation’s last living symbols of the American West
and the essence of what makes Yellowstone and Glacier National Parks national
treasures.”
Based on scientific analysis of
bears’ current habitat needs, the Sierra Club is recommending that the grizzly
recovery zone in Yellowstone be expanded to include four additional key areas of critical
habitat where, according to tracking data, bears are thriving. (See
http://www.sierraclub.org/grizzly for The Bear
Essentials for Recovery: An Alternative
Strategy for Long-Term Recovery of Yellowstone’s Great Bear for more information
on the Sierra Club’s alternative recovery plan.)
“The
grizzly bear still exists in the lower-48 states because of endangered species protection. But even after 25 years of protection, it’s
clear the grizzly is still not out of the emergency room,” concluded
Willcox.
#30#30#30#
June 18, 200
Trials
and Tribulations of a Young Female Grizzly
Last
summer she was a yearling cub--enjoying life, playing with her brother, and learning the
ways of the grizzly from her mother. Then, her life changed with the shout from a tree.
The backpacker saw them first and climbed a small tree. Maybe they would have gone on
their way without noticing him, but he shouted, possibly hoping to scare them away. The
mother came closer to investigate. He shot her and killed her. The cubs were left to fend
for themselves before they had learned all their lessons. This happened in an area called
Jewel Basin, south of Glacier National Park.
The
family had been trapped in 1998. After the death of their mother, the siblings were
trapped and relocated twice in 1999. The young female was fitted with a radio collar and
relocated to the North Fork of the Flathead River just west of Glacier where she denned
last winter near the Canadian border. She dropped her collar in the den.
After
getting into bird feeders at residences near Bonners Ferry, Idaho, she was captured last
Monday night and sent back to Montana. She had reportedly traveled 80-85 miles "as
the crow flies" since leaving her den.
She
made her way from the Northern Continental Divide Grizzly Bear Recovery Zone to within a
few miles of the Selkirk Grizzly Bear Recovery Zone where she was captured.--a feat
never before known to have been accomplished (at least not since human development has
made that such a difficult journey for a grizzly bear). Oh yes, she also crossed the
Cabinet-Yaak Grizzly Bear Recovery Zone. There is not even a previously documented case of
a grizzly bear making the short trip between the Selkirk and Cabinet-Yaak recovery
areas.
Creating
corridors between grizzly bear recovery zones is a major topic of discussion these days.
If grizzlies could move off the islands they are stuck on, genetic diversity across
populations could be enhanced. This young female found a corridor.
March 9, 2000
Notice in the Federal Register
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service announced the availability of a Final
Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) for Grizzly Bear Recovery in the Bitterroot
Ecosystem.
Contacts: Chris Servheen 406-243-4903
Bob Ruesink 208-378-5243
Laird Robinson 406-329-3434
Sharon Rose 303-236-7917, x415
Meggan Laxalt 208-378-5796
Joan Jewett 503-231-61213
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service today announced the availability of a final
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) describing the agency’s preferred alternative
for reintroducing grizzly bears into the Selway-Bitterroot Wilderness and Frank
Church--River of No Return Wilderness areas of Idaho and Montana. The reintroduced bears
would be designated as a nonessential, experimental population and would be under the
management of a 15-member Citizens Management Committee.
The issuance of the final EIS represents the next step in the decision-making process on reintroduction of grizzly bears into the Bitterroot Ecosystem, and the Service is inviting the public to submit comment on the plan. After reviewing the comments, the agency will issue a final decision on the plan later this year.
If the Service adopts the preferred alternative, a special rule under Section 10 (j) of the Endangered Species Act will be finalized to establish the nonessential experimental population and set up the framework for management by the Citizens Management Committee. A designation as a nonessential experimental population permits more flexibility in the management of species that are reintroduced to their historic range.
If the Service decides to go forward with the plan outlined in the EIS and funding is available, the agency would first establish the Citizens Management Committee, made up of local citizens and representatives from State and Federal agencies and the Nez Perce Tribe. Their job would be to implement grizzly bear recovery and develop policies and plans for management of grizzly bears in the experimental area.
"The conservation of threatened and endangered species is at its heart a partnership between the government and the people," said Service Director Jamie Rappaport Clark. "The establishment of a Citizens Management Committee is a unique and innovative way to recover grizzly bears in the Bitterroot and will allow local citizens the opportunity to oversee conservation efforts. It is a reflection of the Service’s commitment to work with states, tribes and local communities."
During the first year, the Service also would install bear-proof trash cans and other sanitation equipment in key areas and conduct information and education programs for the public in western Montana and central Idaho. The actual reintroduction of the bears would occur no earlier than the second year of the plan. The bears would be located largely on Federal land in remote wilderness areas where they are unlikely to come into contact with people.
The purpose of reintroducing grizzlies would be to enhance the species potential for recovery in the lower 48 states.
An estimated 50,000 grizzly bears lived in the contiguous United States prior to European settlement. Grizzly bears have been eliminated from approximately 98 percent of their historic range in the lower 48 states. Today, approximately 1,000-1,100 grizzly bears remain in 5 scattered populations in Montana, Idaho, Wyoming, and Washington. Only two areas in the country (the Yellowstone Ecosystem and the Northern Continental Divide Ecosystem which includes Glacier National Park and the Bob Marshall Wilderness) have populations of several hundred grizzlies. The other three populations have approximately five to 50 grizzly bears each.
The grizzly bear is a native species of the Bitterroot Ecosystem and was once common there. Grizzlies were eliminated from the Bitterroots by the 1940's after a century of intensive persecution. Of all remaining unoccupied grizzly bear habitat in the lower 48 States, the Bitterroot Mountains wilderness area has the best potential for grizzly bear recovery. This area has the components of quality grizzly bear habitat. As such, the Bitterroot Ecosystem offers excellent potential to recover a healthy population of grizzly bears and to boost long-term survival and recovery prospects for this species in the contiguous United States. Recovery of endangered species, and their removal from the list of endangered species, is the ultimate goal of the Endangered Species Act.
Under the plan outlined in the EIS, the Service would reintroduce a minimum of 25 grizzly bears into 25,140 square miles of the Selway-Bitterroot Wilderness over a period of 5 years. The bears would be taken from areas in Canada and the United States that have healthy populations of grizzly bears living in habitats similar to those found in the Bitterroot ecosystem.
All reintroduced bears would be radio-collared and monitored to determine their movements and how they use their habitat, and to keep the public informed through media outreach of general bear locations and recovery efforts. Under the plan, the Service would only consider bears with no known history of conflicts with people for reintroduction.
Suitable bears would be released at remote wilderness sites within the Bitterroot Mountains of east-central Idaho that have high quality bear habitat and low likelihood of human encounters. By designating the reintroduced grizzly population as nonessential experimental, bears that frequent areas of high human use, act aggressively toward humans, or attack livestock would be relocated or destroyed, based on actions in the Interagency Grizzly Bear Guidelines.
The grizzly bear gets its grizzled appearance from long, silver-tipped guard hairs above a brownish coat that can range in shade from blond to black. It has long, light-colored foreclaws (4 inches or more long), a hump between its high shoulders, and a dish-shaped face. An adult female weighs in at 250 to 350 pounds, while a male reaches 400 to 600 pounds. In Idaho and Montana, grizzlies breed from May through July, with most activity in June. They hibernate from November through April. Young born in January during hibernation nurse for almost one year. Females mature at age 4 to 6 and have one to four cubs (usually two) every third year thereafter. Cubs usually stay with their mother for two years, then strike out to establish their own home range. Grizzly bears require a large area for movement and food searches. The bear is an omnivore that feeds on berries, whitebark pine nuts, dead animals, bulbs, roots, grasses, and insects.
Public comments on the final environmental impact statement are welcome and should be sent to Grizzly Bear Recovery Coordinator, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, University Hall-Room 309, University of Montana, Missoula, MT 59812 or electronically mailed to fw6_bitterroot@fws.gov by April 24, 2000. The document also is available for viewing and downloading at http://www.r6.fws.gov/endspp.
* Note: Although minor changes were made in the preferred alternative, Alternative 4 (The Conservation Biology Alternative) remains the best option for grizzly bear recovery in the Bitterroots.
March 1, 2000
NEWS RELEASE
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
134 Union Boulevard
Lakewood, Colorado 80228
Chris Servheen-U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service-406-243-4903
Becky Aus-Yellowstone Ecosystem Subcommittee-307-527-6241
Laird Robinson-Interagency Grizzly Bear Committee-406-329-3434
Sharon Rose-U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service-303-236-7917, x415
PUBLIC TO REVIEW STRATEGY
FOR MANAGING A RECOVERED POPULATION
OF GRIZZLY BEARS IN THE YELLOWSTONE ECOSYSTEM
Today the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service invites the public to review a future strategy to guide state and federal land and wildlife management agencies as they ensure sustained recovery of the grizzly bear for generations to come in the Yellowstone ecosystem.
The Service's recovery plan for grizzly bears in the Yellowstone ecosystem requires a conservation strategy to guide state and federal agencies in managing and maintaining a grizzly bear population after the bears reach recovery and no longer need the protection of the Endangered Species Act. This strategy will be put in place when the grizzly is recovered and removed from the federal list of threatened and endangered wildlife and plants.
Open houses will be held to provide information, answer questions and gather comments on the newly released Conservation Strategy on March 21 from 4:00 - 9:00 p.m. in Cody, Wyoming, at the Holiday Inn; on March 23 from 4:00 - 9:00 p.m. in Jackson Hole, Wyoming, at the Ranch Inn; March 28 from 5:00 - 8:00 p.m. in Bozeman, Montana and April 6 from 7:00 - 9:00 p.m. in Idaho Falls, Idaho, at the Inn at Cavanaugh’s. Public comments on the strategy should be received by the Grizzly Bear Recovery Coordinator, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, University Hall, Room 309, University of Montana, Missoula, Montana 59812 or electronically mailed to FW6_grizzly@fws.gov by May 30, 2000.
Grizzly bear numbers in the Yellowstone ecosystem have increased from less than 200 in the years 1973-1975 to a current estimated number of 400-600, and the population is continuing to increase. More than 200 cubs were known to be born in the Yellowstone area from 1996-1998. Grizzlies are reoccupying many areas outside the Recovery Zone, as designated in the Service's 1993 Revised Recovery Plan, where they have been absent for more than 40 years.
Representatives from the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Forest Service, Department of Interior's National Park Service, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s northwest and mountain-prairie regions and the states of Montana, Wyoming, and Idaho worked together to develop a Conservation Strategy to monitor and maintain the grizzly population and its habitat in the Yellowstone ecosystem. The strategy uses the best currently available scientific methods to maintain the grizzly bear in the Yellowstone ecosystem, and will apply within a designated 9,209-square- mile Primary Conservation Area (PCA). The PCA is divided into 18 bear management units, which are used for habitat analysis. The area within 10 miles of the PCA boundary will also be used for population monitoring.
Annual habitat and population monitoring, coordinated by the Yellowstone Grizzly Management Committee, will measure key indicators for meeting of habitat and population. To maintain these population thresholds and the future health of grizzlies in the Yellowstone ecosystem, the total effect of mortalities, genetic diversity, habitat and food availability and more will be monitored closely after recovery. The four major foods of grizzlies in the Yellowstone area -- cutthroat trout, army cutworm moths, ungulate carcasses and white bark pine cones -- will be monitored to ensure their condition and availability.
In addition, under the Conservation Strategy, bear-livestock depredations inside and surrounding the Primary Conservation Area will be monitored to make sure that these conflicts are resolved according to the protocol established in the strategy.
Development of private lands inside the PCA can lead to an increase in human-bear conflicts. Informing and educating private landowners about living in bear country will be key to managing a recovered bear population. Disposal of garbage, food storage and other activities that may attract grizzlies must be specifically managed. Options like voluntary conservation easements and habitat conservation plans are other ways for private landowners to help.
As hunter-related bear deaths are one of the main causes for bear mortalities in the Yellowstone ecosystem, the number of elk hunters and number of hunter-related bear deaths inside and surrounding the primary conservation area will be checked so that as situations change, management actions can be put in place that offer possible solutions to any problems.
If, for any reason, population or habitat criteria falls below target levels, a status review can be requested, and, if necessary, the grizzly can be placed back under the protection of the Endangered Species Act.
Also under public review recently were habitat criteria that will be needed to maintain a recovered grizzly bear population in the Yellowstone ecosystem. After these criteria are finalized by the Service, they will be appended to the Service’s Grizzly Bear Recovery Plan and included in the final Conservation Strategy. Draft habitat criteria are included in the draft strategy.
Copies of the Conservation Strategy are being mailed during the next two weeks. A copy of the strategy or a summary of this document can also be obtained on the Service’s website http://www.r6.fws.gov/endspp or copies will be available at local libraries in Montana, Wyoming and Idaho.
The objective of any recovery program under the Endangered Species Act
is to recover and delist the threatened or endangered species. Prior to delisting of any
species, the population and demographic targets must be met and the Service must
demonstrate that adequate laws and regulatory mechanisms will be in place to be reasonably
assured that recovery status continues after the Endangered Species Act no longer applies.
The Conservation Strategy does not delist the Yellowstone grizzly bear nor does it propose
any such delisting; rather, the Strategy contains mechanisms for the bear and its habitat
to remain healthy and recovered in the future.
* Note: The estimated number of
grizzly bears in the Yellowstone ecosystem is based on a method that has been challenged
in court and may not be acceptable for purposes of removing the Yellowstone grizzly from
the list of threatened and endangered species. The public comment period ended in
November 99 for the Draft Habitat-Based Recovery Criteria for the Yellowstone
Ecosystem--reportedly, more than 95% of nearly 17,000 respondents want better protection
for the bear and its habitat. That includes expanding the recovery zone to include
habitat grizzlies are using today--habitat many believe the grizzly needs to survive in
the long term.
February 7, 2000
Bear managers deserve credit for offer of detente
By Todd Wilkinson - Follow this link to read entire story: Bozeman
Chronicle
As Yellowstone grizzly bears slumber in their dens, sightings of a white dove have been made circling through the cold Western skies.
For the first time in months, relations between government bear managers and environmentalists are thawing, and the person responsible for the detente is none other than Chris Servheen, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's national grizzly bear recovery coordinator.
November 9, 1999
Notice of a workshop on grizzly reporting and verification efforts in the Bitterroot Ecosystem to be held November 17, 1999 in Missoula,
Montana
In an effort to disseminate information on the identification of grizzly
bears and black bears and to communicate what has gone on in the Bitterroot
Ecosystem in the way of looking for grizzly bears and how sightings and
reports have been handled and checked out, we will hold a workshop in
Missoula in room 203 of the Continuing Education Building on the University
of Montana campus from 1:30 to 4:00 PM on Wednesday November 17. The
Continuing Education Building is adjacent to the University Center on the
east side of campus.
The workshop is free and open to all. People interested in searching for
grizzly bears for the Alliance for the Wild Rockies and associated groups
are especially invited to attend. The program will involve a slide show on
grizzly and black bear identification, a review of the existing protocols
that have been in place since 1984 for handling and judging the credibility
of grizzly bear reports, the use of DNA in validation efforts, a review of
efforts by Idaho Fish and Game in cooperation with the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service, the Forest Service and others to check out reports of
grizzlies in the Bitterroots over the past 16 years, and a review of how
future reports of grizzlies will be handled and checked for credibility.
Please circulate this notice to all those who may be interested so that as
many people as possible who are interested are aware of this workshop. In
an effort to plan for the number of people who will attend so we have enough
space and handouts, please send an email to this address letting us know if
you are planning to attend.
We look forward to seeing you there.
Chris
P.S. Please post this notice on the AWR and wildgriz list servers so that it
receives wide distribution. Thanks.
Christopher Servheen
Grizzly Bear Recovery Coordinator
USFWS
University Hall, Room 309
University of Montana
Missoula, Montana 59812 USA
FAX 406-329-3212
August 9, 1999
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Federal Plan Fails to Protect Grizzly Habitat: Government Takes Flawed First
Step Towards Stripping the Great Bear of Needed Protection.
For More Information, Contact: Louisa Willcox, Sierra Club Grizzly Bear Ecosystems Project
(406) 582-8365
Caroline Byrd, Wyoming Outdoor Council (307) 332-7031
Bob Ekey, The Wilderness Society (406) 586-1600
In a first step toward removing the grizzly from the Endangered Species List,
the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) has released a set of goals that
falls short of what is necessary to protect their habitat in and around
Yellowstone. Six conservation groups expressed strong concerns about the
plan for Yellowstone, one of the last five isolated pockets of America where
the grizzly bear can still be found-and an area increasingly threatened by
development, oil and gas drilling, mining, logging and road building.
Scientists agree that the survival of the grizzly bear in the lower
forty-eight states relies on protecting sufficient habitat. "Once the habitat
is gone so is the grizzly, which has already disappeared from 99% of its
former range in the lower forty-eight states," says Louisa Willcox of the
Sierra Club Grizzly Ecosystems Project. "But unfortunately, the government's
plan would have the effect of confining Yellowstone grizzlies to an area too
small to keep bears here and healthy in the long term."
Bob Ekey of The Wilderness Society notes that, "The government plan is faulty
because it sanctions habitat destruction at a rate that will squeeze grizzly
bears right out of Greater Yellowstone, as if you were squeezing the last
drop out of a sponge."
Conservationists point out that habitat protections are awarded only to a
portion of currently occupied range, inside a line that was drawn when
grizzlies were at precariously low numbers. The plan fails to ensure a
continued linkage between Yellowstone grizzlies and other grizzly bear
populations, forever dooming the Yellowstone bear to isolation and related
genetic and other problems. "In essence, FWS will forever keep bears locked
within an ecological straight-jacket," says Caroline Byrd of the Wyoming
Outdoor Council. "And, since the grizzly functions as the 'coal mine canary'
of the Northern Rockies, plans that harm the bear in its habitat will also
hurt other wildlife, from big game to song birds."
The plan assumes that the status quo today-in terms of quality and quantity
of habitat-is adequate to ensure grizzly recovery tomorrow. But FWS fails
to account for the fact that threats to grizzly bear habitat are mounting:
1. One half million acres of prime habitat are at risk of oil and gas
development which would eliminate bears from areas important to recovery, if
fields are fully developed.
2. Private lands comprising important habitat are being transformed into
subdivisions at a runway pace.
3. Escalating use of public lands by all-terrain vehicles is reducing the
habitat security for this wildland-dependent species.
4. In the last twenty-five years, resident bears have been exterminated from
two grizzly management units on the Targhee Forest as a result of excessive
clearcutting and road building.
5. White bark pine, which provides the grizzly with pine nuts in the fall,
is imperiled by an introduced blister rust disease and global climate
change.
6. In Yellowstone Lake, introduced Lake trout threatens to out-compete and
predate upon Yellowstone cutthroat, potentially reducing by 80% in twenty
years the native trout, an important spring grizzly food.
7. Slaughter of Yellowstone's bison herds by government officials has
greatly reduced this essential food source; at reduced herd sizes, scientists
have documented decreased grizzly reproduction and increased mortality.
Conservationists emphasize that in the future grizzlies will have to rely on
additional and alternative habitats when certain lands are destroyed and key
native foods decline. Brian Peck of the Great Bear Foundation says, "We need
to ask ourselves: are we as humans willing to display the generosity of
spirit necessary to share the landscape with an unpredictable animal that
needs extensive wild country?"
"Even inside the recovery area, this proposal allows for new road building
when we know that roads and the activities that come with roads are precisely
what kill grizzly bears," said Tim Stevens of the Greater Yellowstone
Coalition. Stevens points out FWS proposal could allow new roads and
densities that are known to be lethal for grizzly bears.
In addition, experts maintain that the 200-400 remaining Yellowstone bears
will be at risk of extinction in the long term if they are permanently sealed
off from other grizzly ecosystems. "Unfortunately, as the FWS proposes to
study the problem, new development will proceed and, key linkages, such as
the Centennial Range, Gravellys, and Northern Wind Rivers, potentially
degrading and pinching off the area from the core of the Greater Yellowstone
Ecosystem," says Pam Lichtman of the Jackson Hole Conservation Alliance.
"This plan does nothing to prevent the cutting of these remaining ecological
lifelines."
In addition, the plan compounds problems that the government still has not
resolved in the recovery plan, which was found to be deficient in 1995 by a
Federal judge. In this plan, FWS ignores these underlying problems-and the
fact that it has still never calculated how many bears are needed to remain
viable in the long term, or how much habitat is needed to maintain a healthy
population.
Given these deficiencies, conservationists maintain FWS should go back to
the drawing board and develop a plan that will truly recover the grizzly.
"And as the nature and intensity of these threats increase, it should be
clear that, now more than ever, removing the grizzly from federal protection
would be a mistake," says Louisa Willcox. "Of course, this is about more
than the grizzly -- it is about the future of wildlife and wildlands in the
West, and the integrity of world class ecosystems symbolized by the Great
Bear."
23 June 1999
TO: To Whom it
may Concern
FROM: Wayne Kasworm, U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service, 475 Fish Hatchery Road, Libby, MT 59923
&
nbsp;
(406) 293-4161 ext 105 FAX (406) 293-6338
SUBJECT: Press Release on Mortality of Grizzly Bear 106/352 in Yaak River
Grizzly bear 106 (DJ) was found dead in the 17 Mile drainage 15 miles north of Troy,
Montana on June 10, 1999. She and her two cubs of the year were apparently killed by
another bear. The carcass was largely
consumed by the time biologists arrived at the site. Investigation of the site with
metal detectors and the remains by x-ray did not detect any human involvement in the
death. Based on telemetry locations, the mortality likely occurred during the first
week of June. There was an elk carcass at the site that may have attracted both
bears. Dark colored hair was found at the site to indicate the presence of another
bear.
Grizzly bear 106 had been monitored by radio telemetry since 1986 when she was first
captured by the research program. This monitoring was among the longest continuous
efforts ever accomplished on a single female grizzly bear. Her core home
range encompassed much of the area surrounding Roderick, Clark, and Grizzly Mountains in
the Yaak River drainage. She was also tracked north to the international border and
west into Idaho. Since 1986 she produced 13 cubs including those killed in this
incident. This is a very high rate of reproduction since most grizzly bears produce
only 2 cubs in a litter at 3 year intervals. She accomplished this by keeping a few
litters for only 1.5 years then breeding again. Six of the 13 cubs are known or
suspected to be dead. One female cub survived to adult status and has produced 2 litters
of cubs since 1994. Another female offspring is currently radio collared and
expected to produce cubs next year. Two additional female offspring turned
4-years-old this year.
Bear 106 was last captured on August 28, 1998. She was in good condition and was
estimated to weigh 325 pounds. The fact that she produced a litter of 2 cubs during
1999 is also an indication that she was doing well. Bears that do not obtain
sufficient food during the summer typically do not produce cubs the following year.
Incidents of bears killing other bears are not common but have been documented in other
areas. One adult female from the South Fork of the Flathead River study was believed
killed and fed upon by an adult male. A similar incident was documented in the Selkirk
Mountains by a grizzly bear research effort. Other incidents typically have involved
adult males killing smaller bears. One of bear 106's offspring was killed by another
grizzly bear while caught in a trap set for research purposes in 1989 at a site less than
5 miles north of this mortality.
For further information contact Wayne Kasworm at (406) 293-4161 ext 105.
April 22, 1999
Chris Servheen 406-243-4903
Sharon Rose 303-236-7917, x415
U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE MAKES NEW FINDING ON
CABINET-YAAK/SELKIRK POPULATION OF GRIZZLY BEARS
Based on an analysis of the status of the grizzly bear population in the Cabinet-Yaak and Selkirk recovery zones of Idaho, Montana, and Washington, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has determined that reclassifying the population from threatened to endangered is warranted but precluded by the need to protect other species.
The Service’s analysis, conducted in response to a U.S. District Court order, weighed the best scientific and commercial information available on past, present, and future threats faced by grizzly bears in the two recovery zones, which the Service is now combining into one zone.
Biologists concluded the population is in danger of extinction because it is small and threatened by habitat alteration and the cumulative impacts of recreation, timber harvest, mining, road construction and other human activities. In addition it is facing potential isolation by activities across the border in Canada.
However, following established policy, the Service decided not to dedicate its limited resources to reclassifying a species that is already protected under the Act when other unlisted species need protection.
Because of the large number of species needing protection under the Endangered Species Act, the Service uses a priority system to deal first with the species in the most serious need of protection. According to this listing guidance, the reclassification of already listed species, such as the grizzly bear, has a lower priority than processing proposed listings of new species to the threatened and endangered species list.
Since 1993, the Service has issued listing decisions on 19 species in its Mountain-Prairie Region. At the present time, 16 additional higher priority candidate species in this region need to be addressed, putting them ahead of any reclassifications.
"Grizzly bears in the Cabinet-Yaak/Selkirk recovery zone should be classified as endangered according to our most recent data, but they are already receiving protection under the Endangered Species Act as a threatened species," said Ralph Morgenweck, director for the Service's Mountain-Prairie region. "The Service has to focus its resources on other species that have been proposed for listing, such as the Canada lynx or mountain plover, or are being reviewed for possible listing, before we reclassify the grizzly bear."
During the preparation of the new finding to determine whether the grizzly bear should be reclassified as endangered, Service biologists found new information indicating that grizzly bears in the Selkirk and Cabinet-Yaak recovery zones move from one zone to the other. The connection of the two zones appears to occur within British Columbia, within 20 miles of the international boundary.
This information indicates that there is possibly a genetic link among grizzly bear populations in the Selkirk and Cabinet-Yaak areas. With this new data, the Service decided to combine the two recovery zones into one zone that encompasses about 3,600 square miles of the 38,000 square miles of remaining grizzly bear habitat in the United States. Grizzly bears in the combined Cabinet-Yaak/Selkirk recovery zone number less than 100 animals.
The Service still believes that movement of grizzly bears between any of the other recovery zones, which include Yellowstone, North Cascades, Northern Continental Divide, and the Bitterroot, does not occur.
Both the Selkirk and Cabinet-Yaak areas are unique ecological settings because they contain low elevation inland habitat for grizzlies. Significant portions of the recovery zone along the Yaak River and on the east side of the Selkirk Mountains occur in areas between 2,000 and 4,000 feet in elevation, with wet, dense forests dominated largely by cedar and hemlock. These habitat types are either limited or not present in the other recovery zones.
Grizzly bears (Ursus arctos horribilis) inhabited most of the western United States and were believed to number 50,000 individuals at the time of the Lewis and Clark expedition in the early 1800s. Populations declined to less than 1,000 in the conterminous 48 states by the 1970s.
The Service's finding of "warranted but precluded" was a result of two petitions filed by the Fund for Animals, Inc. and the Biodiversity Legal Foundation in early 1991 that requested the Service to reclassify the grizzly bear from threatened to endangered in the Cabinet-Yaak and Selkirk ecosystems. The petition from Fund for Animals also requested that the Service reclassify grizzly bears in the Yellowstone and Northern Continental Divide ecosystems.
The Service issued a finding of "not warranted" for Yellowstone and Northern Continental Divide ecosystems, but found that there was substantial information to do a status review on the Cabinet-Yaak and Selkirk areas.
On February 12, 1993, the Service issued a "warranted but precluded" finding for the Cabinet-Yaak and a "not warranted" finding for the Selkirk ecosystem. The U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia asked the Service for additional information and analysis on overuse, particularly trends of human-caused mortality, survival and reproductive rates in the Selkirk recovery zone. In March 1996, the Service responded to the court with supplementary information.
In June 1998, the Service again found the Cabinet-Yaak recovery zone to be "warranted but precluded" for reclassification. In October 1998, the court sent the Selkirk matter back to the Service. In January 1999, the Service requested additional time to respond to the court order.
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is the principal federal agency responsible for conserving, protecting, and enhancing fish and wildlife and their habitats for the continuing benefit of the American people. The Service manages the 93-million-acre National Wildlife Refuge System comprised of more than 500 national wildlife refuges, thousands of small wetlands, and other special management areas. It also operates 66 national fish hatcheries and 78 Ecological Services field stations. The agency enforces Federal wildlife laws, administers the Endangered Species Act, manages migratory bird populations, restores nationally significant fisheries, conserves and restores wildlife habitat such as wetlands, and helps foreign governments with their conservation efforts. It also oversees the Federal Aid program that distributes hundreds of millions of dollars in excise taxes on fishing and hunting equipment to state fish and wildlife agencies.
APRIL 22, 1999
REPUBLICANS OPPOSE GRIZZLY DE-LISTING
The following is a press release which again demonstrates that there is
bi-partisan support for environmental protection.
Contact: Mike Bader, 406-721-5420, mailto:awr@wildrockies.org
Republican Congressmen Oppose Grizzly Bear De-Listing
A News Release from Alliance for the Wild Rockies
MISSOULA?? Four Republican U.S. Congressmen, including House Banking Committee Chairman
Jim Leach, today sent a letter to Interior Secretary Bruce Babbitt opposing de-listing of
grizzly bears in the Yellowstone ecosystem. Expressing concern about “a rush to
judgment to hasten the de-listing process,” they urged greater involvement of
scientists in the private sector who have been critical of recovery efforts by the U.S.
Fish & Wildlife Service.
The letter was signed by Rep. Christopher Shays (R-Connecticut), Rep. Merrill Cook
(R-Utah), Rep. Jim Leach (R-Iowa), and Rep. Tom Campbell (R-California).
“We strongly agree with putting de-listing on hold while we obtain a thorough
independent peer review by non-government scientists,” said Mike Bader, executive
director of the Alliance for the Wild Rockies.
“There is too much doubt regarding the viability of the grizzly population in
Yellowstone to proceed with de-listing. The population is isolated, and this island of
habitat continues to shrink. Moreover, the timber, oil, and mining industries are eagerly
waiting at the door to invade critical habitat as soon as the grizzly is de-listed.”
A full text of the letter follows:
The Honorable Bruce Babbitt April 22, 1999
Secretary of the Interior
1849 C Street, NW
Washington, D.C. 20240
Dear Mr. Secretary:
We are writing to request you put on hold current plans to proceed with the removal of the
grizzly bear from the list of threatened and endangered species in the greater Yellowstone
ecosystem.
Despite some signs of progress toward conservation of the grizzly and its shrinking range,
virtually all aspects of the grizzly bear recovery program continue to be shrouded in
controversy.
We are particularly concerned with the amount of scientific debate over the current
biological status of the grizzly population, and an apparent rush to judgment to hasten
the de-listing process.
It is our understanding some of the nation's leading grizzly bear scientists have
disputed the current population estimates provided by the U.S. Fish &
Wildlife Service. Moreover, the methods for determining population status and trends have
also been sharply challenged.
Litigation concerning the overall grizzly bear recovery plan continues under federal court
supervision and is at yet unresolved. Its status as an isolated island population also
raises serious concerns over its genetic viability, throwing the prospects for long-term
persistence of the Yellowstone grizzly population into doubt.
Under these circumstances we believe the continued movement toward de-listing is both
premature and inappropriate. Premature removal of federal protection for the grizzly bear
in the greater Yellowstone
ecosystem, which may leave this rare and unique species vulnerable to decline and possible
extinction, would be tragic.
We are also concerned with the lack of responsiveness to the concerns of scientists in the
private sector who have reached differing conclusions as to the status of the grizzly
bear. In short, we are not convinced de-listing is appropriate at this time.
We urge you to immediately look into this matter, and we look forward to your timely
response to our concerns.
Sincerely,
Christopher Shays
Member of Congress
Merrill Cook
Member of Congress
Jim Leach
Member of Congress
Tom Campbell
Member of Congress
Even though it's snowing again today there are only a few more weeks of winter and we
are still going strong. The cabin is full of energetic volunteers who have worked
hard this week to keep the buffalo
out of the traps. Keep spreading the word and remembering the buffalo in your thoughts as
we head towards spring.
Buffalo Field Campaign
formerly Buffalo Nations
P.O. Box 957 West Yellowstone, MT 59758
Phone (406) 646-0070 Fax (406) 646-0071
E-mail: buffalo@wildrockies.org.
Forest Service Issues Warning to Department of Livestock for Illegal Hazing
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: April 8, 1999
Media Contacts: Mike Mease, Jennifer Karinen (406) 646-0070
WEST YELLOWSTONE: The U.S. Forest Service issued a warning to the Montana Department
of Livestock this week for hazing buffalo in closed eagle habitat March 31.
After watching video footage provided by the Buffalo Field Campaign of the hazing
operation, District Ranger Gary Benes, Assistant Ranger Claude Coffin and Acting District
Ranger Gene Hardin said in a letter that the video showed the DOL violated requirements of
their Special-use permit by hazing buffalo with snowmobiles within 1/4 mile of open water
prior to 10 a.m.
Hardin says there are no set number of warnings for violations before other action is
taken.
Along with being a key area in winter migration for Yellowstone bison, Horse Butte is
critical habitat for threatened bald eagles. In an attempt to protect nesting sites the
Forest Service added restrictions to the DOL's use permit allowing them to operate their
bison trap used to capture and test bison leaving Yellowstone National Park.
According to these restrictions, activities associated with the removal of bison on the
Madison arm and upper Madison river are only to be allowed between 10:00 a.m. and 3 p.m.
Volunteers for the campaign filmed the operation involving nine snowmobiles before 7 a.m.
In addition to water restrictions, several areas on the Butte are off-limits to any
activity. However, DOL can get special permission to enter these areas on a case by
case basis.
"They create restrictions to protect bald eagles but they can easily be broken.
There are no clear guidelines for granting special permission and no set
number of warnings for DOL violations. It appears the closures are purely
political and there is no real protection for wildlife," said volunteer Summer
Nelson.
Summer grazing on Horse Butte amounts to 172 cow/calf pairs bringing in less than $800 to
the U.S. Treasury. The Horse Butte capture facility has been permitted to operate
during winter for the next ten years. Eighteen of the 29 buffalo caught Mar. 31 were
shipped to slaughter bringing the number killed this winter to 45.
Buffalo Field Campaign
(formerly Buffalo Nations)
PO Box 957
West Yellowstone, MT 59758
406-646-0070 phone
406-646-0071 fax
buffalo@wildrockies.org
www.wildrockies.org/buffalo
********************************************************************
Buffalo-talk is a service of Buffalo Field Campaign and the Wild Rockies
InfoNet at http://www.wildrockies.org.
Subscribe: mailto:Buffalo-Talk-on@vortex.wildrockies.org
Unsubscribe: mailto:Buffalo-Talk-off@vortex.wildrockies.org
News Submissions or Problems: mailto: buffalo-talk@wildrockies.org
February 5, 1999
Federal Agency Has Ignored Judge for Two Years
Conservationists Go to Court Saying Grizzly Bear Recovery Can’t Wait for More
Bureaucratic Foot-Dragging
&
nbsp;
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
&
nbsp;
CONTACT:
Jim Angell, Earthjustice Legal Defense Fund, (406) 586-9699
Louisa Willcox, Sierra Club Grizzly Bear Ecosystems Project, (406) 582-8365
Caroline Byrd, Wyoming Outdoor Council, (307) 332-7031
Tim Stevens, Greater Yellowstone Coalition, (406) 586-1593
Bozeman, MT—On Friday, February 5, Earthjustice Legal Defense Fund filed a motion on
behalf of 19 conservation groups against the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to force the
agency to comply with a 1995 federal court order to address serious deficiencies in the
Grizzly Bear Recovery Plan. Judge Paul
Friedman directed the agency to adopt an accurate method of measuring grizzly populations,
and to address other serious weaknesses in the recovery plan. The Fish and Wildlife
Service has done nothing to respond to the judge’s order.
"Under the court’s order, the Fish and Wildlife Service was required to address
the recovery plan’s deficiencies more than two years ago," said Jim Angell,
attorney with Earthjustice Legal Defense Fund. "This agency’s failure to meet
the court deadline is a testament to the agency’s arrogance and refusal to face up to
the many problems that plague the Recovery Plan."
"We are particularly concerned with the agency’s continued reliance on methods
of measuring grizzly populations that are simply not accurate, and its dependence on
dwindling bears on the Canadian side of the border as a means to bolster recovery in the
U.S.," said Louisa Willcox of the Sierra Club Grizzly
Bear Ecosystems Project.
"The Fish and Wildlife Service must answer basic questions regarding how many bears
we have and how much habitat is needed for recovery before forging ahead to delist
them," said Caroline Byrd of Wyoming Outdoor Council. "Key grizzly bear habitat
in Wyoming is on the block for oil and gas development. We may lose these crucial areas
while the government drags its feet and resists
addressing the deficiencies in the Grizzly Bear Recovery Plan."
&
nbsp; &n
bsp;
--MORE--
This motion follows on the heels of numerous statements by Fish and Wildlife Service
Grizzly Bear Recovery Coordinator that the grizzly will be soon delisted or removed from
protections under the Endangered Species Act. "It is sadly ironic that delisting is
moving forward even though the agency’s
population measures are not reliable enough to determine the bear’s status,"
said Tim Stevens of Greater Yellowstone Coalition.
This motion also follows a recent incident in which two Sierra Club employees were thrown
out of a meeting where state and federal wildlife managers were formulating a plan for
delisting the Yellowstone grizzly. Because of Montana’s open meetings policies, state
employees also left the meeting. "It is a poor
state of affairs when the federal government sacrifices both good science and democratic
principles in the pursuit of a base political agenda," said Louisa Willcox.
"Premature delisting of grizzly bears is a move to kick grizzlies out of the
lifeboat, the Noah’s Ark represented by Endangered Species Act
protections."
Feb. 1, 1999
From the Bozeman Chronicle, Monday Feb. 1, 1999
Screcy ehas no place in grizzly bear management
By Todd Wilkinson
On the surface, when read in the isolated context of a newspaper, the
stories about
conservationists being tossed out of a grizzly bear management meeting might appear inane.
But look beneath the opaqueness and what you find are larger issues of democracy and government accountability — in addition, of course, to the fate of the Yellowstone grizzly, one of the most beloved animals in America.
Last week, were it not for the heroic intervention of the Montana Department of Fish Wildlife and Parks, and the U.S. Forest Service, the public today would still be denied access to information it has a right to know.
As you may recall, Dr. Christopher Servheen, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s Grizzly Bear Recovery Coordinator, ordered Vanessa Johnson and Louisa Willcox of the Sierra Club to leave what had been organized as a secret meeting of government bear managers in Bozeman.
I say “secret” because no public notice was given of the meeting, no public record would have been published of what was said, and no members of the public were invited to attend — even though thousands of public tax dollars were spent assembling public representatives of four federal and three state agencies.
Fortunately, Arnie Dood, Montana’s endangered species biologist, walked out of the meeting in protest and he received unqualified support from his colleague, Kurt Alt, who said the rationale used by Servheen was completely unjustified.
A short time later, Forest Service regional director Dale Bosworth and his assistant, Laird Robinson announced they would craft a new policy to ensure that similar meetings remain open to the public.
Kudos to Dood, Alt, Bosworth and Robinson, but the fact is, fellas, the action is long overdue, and the closed meetings are symptomatic of a serious problem.
This was not the first time that Dr. Servheen has arrogantly shut the public out of grizzly bear meetings. Over the last four years, dozens of closed-door meetings have been premised on the following rationale:
That if the public learns what is actually said at the meetings, conservation groups might bring a lawsuit against the Fish and Wildlife Service’s management of federally protected grizzlies.
“You would think that if they truly believe everything they did is on the up and up, then they would have nothing to fear, but their reaction is to bar the doors and kill the messenger,” says Jim Angell, an attorney with Earthjustice Legal Defense Fund.
“It has become a siege mentality amongst bear managers who are fearful of any public oversight,” he added. “This closed-door attitude where everything is done in secret fosters distrust and it leaves the public with no other option but litigation to open the doors.”
Dr. Servheen claims that raging debates occur between various state and federal bear managers over habitat protection plans for the grizzly, and that if the public were present, some bureaucrats might be less than candid.
What he fails to recognize is that the public has a right to know where public agencies stand on grizzly bear management issues.
If there are philosophical disagreements, then we, as citizens, deserve to hear what they are. Again, this is not the first time bear managers under Dr. Servheen’s leadership have resorted to stealth over full disclosure.
In December, wildlife demographer Craig Pease, a professor at the University of Vermont Law School, filed a Freedom of Information Act request to obtain scientific data on grizzly bears collected by the Yellowstone Grizzly Bear Study Team.
The study team is a public entity, staffed by public employees who are paid with public money. But grizzly bear managers have repeatedly tried to prevent Pease and others from obtaining the information because it might be used to criticize Servheen’s bear conservation strategy.
In 1997, Servheen attempted to get Pease professionally discredited after Pease filed a similar FOIA. Servheen accused him of trying to purloin proprietary information.
The question, of course, is proprietary for whom? Although scientific protocol prescribes that the researcher who collects the data will have first right to publish it, ownership ultimately resides with American citizens.
Why is intensive scrutiny of bear managers so critical?
Consider this: The same body that has been publicly funded to study the grizzly for the last 20 years, decides how research will be conducted, collects the data, interprets the data, presents highly-selected data to the public, and then tells us which management option we should choose.
One could argue that because the process is so tightly controlled, and not scrutinized by outside, independent biologists, that it could easily be slanted to support predetermined outcomes. Or worse, that research projects could be awarded only to those biologists who will produce results favorable to certain points of view held by certain managers with personal agendas.
The U.S. Office of Management and Budget recently published a memorandum on the obligation of public agencies to make information available for public review.
The memo was issued to serve notice upon agencies taking closed-door approaches in order to control and essentially monopolize how information is disseminated.
“Federal agencies are often the sole suppliers of the information they hold,” the OMB wrote. “The agencies have either created or collected the information using public funds ... and no one else has it.”
Hence, the OMB notes, “agencies need to take care that their behavior does not inappropriately constrain public access to government information ... Statutes such as FOIA establish a broad and general obligation on the part of federal agencies to make government information available to the public and to avoid erecting barriers that impede public access.”
Why do we need openness on the issue of managing the Yellowstone grizzly? Because democracy hangs in the balance.
Todd Wilkinson’s syndicated column appears in the Chronicle every Monday. He writes about suppression of grizzly bear scientists in his book, Science Under Siege: The Politicians’ War on Nature and Truth.
December 2-3, 1998: The IGBC met in Missoula, Montana. The meetings were open to the public. Subcommittees for they Yellowstone, Northern Continental Divide (NCDE), and Selkirk/Cabinet-Yaak met on December 1 at various locations in Missoula and were also open to the public, although for some unknown reason I was told by a representative of the Selkirk/Cabinet-Yaak Subcommittee that their meeting was closed to the public--seems they are more comfortable doing business behind closed doors.
Twenty-three grizzly bears have reportedly been killed in and around Glacier National Park—Northern Continental Divide Grizzly Bear Ecosystem (NCDE)—in 1998. On December 3, 1998, a draft report on Grizzly Bear Mortalities in the Lower 48 States was made available at the Interagency Grizzly Bear Committee (IGBC) meeting in Missoula, Montana. The report lists 25 grizzly bear mortalities in the NCDE so far in 1998. Corrections could lower that number by a couple.
A December 2 article in the Missoulian reported that the illegal shooting of a 3-year old male grizzly north of Polebridge, Montana has brought the number of known human-caused grizzly bear mortalities in the NCDE to 23. The young grizzly was seen alive on the night of November 24 by bear management officials of the Montana Department of Fish, Wildlife, and Parks. He was found dead the next morning.
As of August 5, 10 grizzly bears had already been killed in the NCDE in 1998. According to statements attributed to Arnold Dood, Montana's endangered species coordinator, he was not alarmed. Six of those grizzlies were female. An Associated press story said, "That would normally be a major concern to those associated with grizzly bear recovery, but Dood said four of the six females were no older than three years, and were not part of the breeding population." Contrary to Dood's lack of concern over the death of young female grizzly bears, the loss of young female grizzlies is the most tragic for a threatened population, such as the NCDE and every other grizzly bear population in the lower forty-eight states.
Dood stated that grizzly bear mortality in the NCDE has declined for more than 20 years and that for several years after 1975, 21 grizzlies a year were dying but since the early 1980s the number of mortalities is way down. What he does not say is that between 1975 and 1985 an average of 10.2 grizzlies were killed each year by hunters. One reason grizzly bear mortality in the NCDE has been reduced is that grizzly bear hunting has been eliminated.
How many grizzly bear mortalities in the NCDE does it take before Dood becomes concerned? He commented on the draft mortality report at the IGBC meeting in Missoula, but I did not hear him express any concern for the number of mortalities recorded—evidently now up to at least 23.
With friends like Arnold Dood, grizzly bears in the NCDE need no enemies.
October 30, 1998
Good News for the Endangered Selkirk Grizzly Bears
Federal district court Judge Paul Friedman ruled for the second time in four years that the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has failed to take the necessary steps to provide protection for the Selkirk Grizzlies. Go to the Selkirk/Cabinet-Yaak Grizzly Bear Ecosystems page for the details. Although this decision is good news, the Selkirk Grizzlies will need protection of existing habitat, restoration of depleted habitat, and elimination of human-caused mortalities to have any chance to recover to a healthy status. Being listed as an endangered species is really not "good news."
October 1998
Note: This remains posted because the conditions of 1998 will return in
other years.
Grizzly bears had a tough time finding their
usual and accustomed foods in many areas of the Northern Rockies in 1998 and
were looking elsewhere for food, often in developed areas. As the end
of summer approaches, bears enter a biological phase called hyperphagia, the
period of time when they eat tremendous amounts of food to store extra pounds
of fat before entering the den. Huckleberries are one of their favorite
foods at this time of year. This year, the huckleberry crop failed.
Grizzly bears and black bears were trapped in record numbers from north Idaho
to Glacier National Park, as they were attracted to developed areas in search
of food. Human food and garbage must be properly stored to prevent
bears from obtaining it. For more information see Living
With Grizzlies.
Links To Pages On This Site
Email: fcoise49@hotmail.com