Bringing Back Grizzlies

After twice delaying grizzly hunts in Idaho and Wyoming, U.S. District Judge Dana Christensen on Monday ruled to restore federal protections for the bears. He said the case was “not about the ethics of hunting” but about whether federal officials adequately considered threats to the species’ long-term recovery.

This week a federal judge overturned the delisting of the Yellowstone grizzly bear, restoring the protections of the Endangered Species Act.

That’s great news for the grizzly bears, which certainly weren’t going to benefit from being hunted, and for all the grizzly bear enthusiasts in the local area and across the nation. The renewed protections should boost tourism by alleviating concerns of tourists, who have been staying away due to distaste for state anti-grizzly policies.

In addition to the immediate impacts, the relisting of the grizzly bear presents the opportunity to address unresolved issues around grizzly conservation that got swept to the margins during the rush to remove Endangered Species Act protections.

Foremost is the isolated and imperiled status of the bear itself. The original recovery plan required that a grizzly population become established in the mountains of the Selway-Bitterroot to provide a connecting corridor to Yellowstone.

The U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Sheep Experiment Station along the Idaho-Montana border is a problematic impediment to this wildlife linkage, and congressional efforts to shut down this antiquated and obsolete facility were thwarted by last-ditch efforts by Idaho politicians. It’s time to let the sheep station go.

Grizzly bear food supplies have grown increasing tenuous with the loss of cutthroat trout spawning runs and whitebark pine nut crops, and as grizzlies wander farther afield in search of food, bear-human conflicts — and numbers of grizzlies killed in their wake — are increasing. Some communities can and should do more to bearproof food and garbage storage.

And finally, the Wyoming state management plan needs an overhaul. Entire mountain ranges completely suited for grizzly habitat — the Salt River and Wyoming Ranges — were excluded from the plan, as was a big chunk of the Bridger Wilderness. These were excluded not for any biological reason but because livestock permittees didn’t want to share our public lands with grizzlies.

The good news is that conservation groups (full disclosure: including Western Watersheds Project’s settlement fund) bought out grazing allotments in the northern Wyoming Range and Wind River Range, with the specific goal of permanently ending such conflicts between the livestock industry and native wildlife, including grizzly bears. These “social” problems are now resolved, and the geography of grizzly bear recovery needs to be expanded accordingly.

There are a great number of groups and individuals that deserve our thanks for this victory. Western Watersheds Project was proud to be among such a powerful assemblage of grizzly advocates. From the conservation, tribal and animal-rights groups to their attorneys to individual plaintiffs, this victory really was a team effort. A diverse community came together to fight this illegal delisting and worked together for this outcome.

Much gratitude is due to the indigenous groups who played a key role in the litigation, and those that signed an international treaty together with Canadian First Nations affirming the religious significance of grizzly bears to their cultural traditions.

“The grizzly is part of us and we are part of the grizzly culturally, spiritually and ceremonially,” says the treaty. “Our ancient relationship is so close and so embodied in us that the grizzly is the spirit of our holistic eco-cultural life-ways.”

This visionary agreement recognizes the dwindling grizzly food sources in the Yellowstone ecosystem, calls for linkage zones between existing fragmented grizzly bear populations and commits the tribes to cooperating with research scientists to expand our knowledge of the majestic creatures. And numerous tribal entities backed up this treaty with legal action, including the Crow Indian Tribe, Crow Creek Sioux Tribe, Standing Rock Sioux Tribe, Lower Brule Sioux Tribe, Ponca Tribe of Nebraska, Crazy Dog Society, Hopi Nation Bear Clan, Northern Arapaho Elders Society, the Northern Cheyenne Tribe and 10 individual tribal members. The lawsuit — and the victory — honors the human-grizzly relationship by insisting that the bears stay protected.

The states of Wyoming, Montana and Idaho tried to sell the court the idea that state management — including a certain level of state-sanctioned bear killing — is necessary to gain “social acceptance” for recovering grizzly populations. The judge didn’t buy it, and neither do we. Grizzly bears have enjoyed strong social acceptance in the Yellowstone ecosystem precisely because it was illegal for average citizens to kill them.

We hope to see the grizzly bear enjoy such full protection, and social acceptance, at the very least until the population is truly recovered.

Erik Molvar is a wildlife biologist and executive director of Western Watersheds Project, a nonprofit conservation group dedicated to protecting and restoring watersheds and wildlife across the West. Guest Shots are solely the opinion of their author.

Recommended for you

(7) comments

Chad guenter

"""""Communities benefit from grizzly relisting""""

A title as disconnected from reality as the opinion that follows.

Tony Rutherford

What are the odds of drawing a grizzly tag? 1 in 500 or less?

I read where the tag fees wouldn't be refunded if the hunt didn't take place......but I've also read where WG&F was refunded elk tag fees in areas impacted by fires. If I had paid for a tag I'd be asking some refund questions for sure.

Ken Chison

Hunter's that applied were charged a $5 non refundable fee that I don't think any hunters cares about being reimbursed for. The game and fish has been on the hook 40 million dollars managing the Bears for the last 40 years anyhow. The first people that had to pay for their tags will receive a full refund for their tag.. I believe about 8,000 people applied for approximately 22 tags. But a few of the resistance had to apply to try and save a bear that is going to be killed, regardless.

Ken Chison

guess this author hasn't been reading about all the record numbers of visitors to Grand Teton and Yellowstone now has he? Not one single person would not come to Wyoming if we would have had the hunt. And if it will cut down on the number of Tourists I believe that would probably be a great thing. The Bears he refers to are going to be no farther than a hundred yards off the road in Grand Teton or Yellowstone. Not a one of those Touristd was going to see a bear in the backcountry.

Ed Loosli

In this day and age when Republicans are openly against a pollution free environment and our wildlife like grizzly bears are literally "under the gun", it is worth honoring America's court system, which remains largely independent from the politics of the day... Many countries are not as fortunate as the U.S. in having an independent judicial system. Judge Christensen based his lengthy judgement in favor of keeping the Yellowstone areas grizzly bears on the Endangered Species list purely on the law and the best available science.

William Addeo

Erik Molvar; You are hopelessly lost in a sea of emotion that is sinking your ship. Stupid nonsensical compassionate diatribes like yours are the reason why people are getting killed by bears. I suppose you are pro abortion also? Human life has no value when you talk to environmental wackos. You speak about systems to not feed bears? That's because they become dependent on humans for food? What about our welfare system? We feed millions people a year who are totally dependent on government for food. Hunters are the biggest conservationists in the land. Killing bears preserves the species for the future by insuring that they don't out eat their food supply. It's called control hunting to insure that the animals will be here tomorrow. Timothy Treadwell learned the hard way that there are just too many bears. It's unbelievable to me that the resent hunting tragedy didn't prove to be a lesson that we just have way too many bears. The real tragedy here is how you people worship animals and condemn human life in the womb. That's the root of all of our problems, isn't it?
God Bless America

Tony Rutherford

At what point would the removal of grizzlies through hunting be acceptable?

Welcome to the discussion.

Please note: Online comments may also run in our print publications.
Keep it clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
Please turn off your CAPS LOCK.
No personal attacks. Discuss issues & opinions rather than denigrating someone with an opposing view.
No political attacks. Refrain from using negative slang when identifying political parties.
Be truthful. Don’t knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be proactive. Use the “Report” link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
Share with us. We’d love to hear eyewitness accounts or history behind an article.
Use your real name: Anonymous commenting is not allowed.