Grizzly Death

Thanks to efforts of environmentalists and Bill Bonko the Liberal MLA, who acted on my suggestion that environmentalists buy Grizzly Hunt lottery licenses and not use them to protest the hunt, the annual Alberta sport hunt (massacre) of Grizzlies was ended. But Grizzlies are still endangered. There are now only 345-500 of them left in the province.

Unfortunately the department in charge of declaring them an endangered species is run by the Great white-hunter reactionary Ted Morton.

Alberta wants kids to get hunting

Declaration of protected spaces is not on his agenda either as he promotes sustainable resource development, which means more intrusion and encroachment into Grizzly habitat for industrial development.

Alberta suspended the annual spring grizzly hunt for three years in 2006 when initial numbers suggested the population was well below the 1,000 bears that had previously been estimated.

But grizzlies are still dying from what biologists term "human-caused mortality." They say that must be addressed soon if grizzlies are to survive.

"We've suspended the hunt, but hunting really isn't the issue," says mountain park carnivore expert Mike Gibeau.

Most grizzlies are shot in self-defence, or are mistaken for black bears. Some are killed legally by aboriginal hunters, others are shot by poachers or thrill-killers.

Some die in highway or railway accidents. Some are destroyed when they become nuisance bears and pose a threat to public safety by barging into people's yards to feast on everything from garbage and grain to apples and pet food.

The national parks aren't safe havens for grizzlies, either. More than 50 have died in Banff, Yoho, Kootenay and Jasper since 1990, mostly in highway and railway accidents or because they posed a threat.

Many Albertans believe that if Alberta loses its grizzlies, it loses the wilderness. The grizzly is seen as an icon of the wild, but more importantly, it is an umbrella species. If its space is protected, other plants and animals will have space to thrive as well.

Officially, grizzlies are considered "a species that may be at risk."

But the Alberta Endangered Species Conservation Committee recommended in 2002 that grizzlies should be designated a "threatened" species under the provincial Wildlife Act. That was based on estimates that there were only 1,000 grizzly bears left in Alberta.

The government has yet to move on that recommendation despite recent surveys that now suggest the number could be less than half that.

Alberta Sustainable Resource Development established a 15-member Grizzly Bear Recovery Team to study the issue and draft a strategy to ensure grizzlies aren't wiped out, as they have been in neighbouring Saskatchewan and jurisdictions further east.

The team presented its report and recommendations in 2005. Sustainable Resource Development Minister Ted Morton is expected to announce his department's response to the plan in the near future. Critics say implementing the plan is long overdue.

Grizzlies live in a narrow band along the province's western boundary, primarily between Highway 16 and Highway 3.

Recent DNA testing has produced estimates that there are about 180 bears in that area, outside the mountain parks, and about 160 bears inside the parks, for a total of about 340 grizzlies. Counts of bears south of Highway 3 and north of Highway 16 haven't been completed, but those areas are not expected to yield high numbers.

"We've been far too casual about the shootings and the deaths of bears," laments Jim Pissot of Defenders of Wildlife Canada. "Now that we're aware that there are far fewer than 500, the onus is on the minister to take immediate steps to protect habitat and bears."

Bear biologists say roads are the biggest factor in grizzly deaths. Most human-caused deaths occur within 500 metres of a road.

As a Republican from California I am sure Mr. Morton would appreciate the Alberta revision of the American second amendment;


























Find blog posts, photos, events and more off-site about:
Ted Morton, Alberta, Grizzly, hunting, Bears endangered species, Minister of Sustainable Resources,

Tags

Alberta

Canada

wilderness

Big Game Hunting

Grizzly

endangeredspecies

environment

hunting

THOSE ARE ALBERTA GRIZZLIES
Montana seeks to end protections for Glacier-area grizzlies

BILLINGS, Mont. (AP) — Montana is asking the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to lift threatened species protections for grizzly bears in the northern portion of the state, including areas in and around Glacier National Park, officials said Monday.

© Provided by The Canadian Press

The request, if granted, would open the door to public hunting of grizzlies in Montana for the first time in three decades. It comes after bear populations have expanded, spurring more run-ins including grizzly attacks on livestock and periodic maulings of people.


Removing federal protections would give state wildlife officials more flexibility to deal with bears that get into conflicts, Montana Gov. Greg Gianforte said. But wildlife advocates warned of overhunting if protections are lifted.


GLACIER NATIONAL PARK IS SHARED WITH CANADA, BECAUSE ITS THE ROCKIES
Northwest Montana has the largest concentration of grizzlies in the Lower 48 states, with more than 1,000 bears across Glacier National Park and nearby expanses of forested wilderness, an area known as the Northern Continental Divide Ecosystem.

In March, U.S. government scientists said the region's grizzlies are biologically recovered, but need continued protection under the Endangered Species Act because of human-caused bear deaths and other pressures.

Hunting of grizzlies is banned in the U.S. outside Alaska. Bears considered problematic are regularly killed by wildlife officials.

“We’ve shown the ability to manage bears, protect their habitat and population numbers," Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks Director Hank Worsech said in a statement. "It’s time for us to have full authority for grizzly bears in Montana.”

But wildlife advocates cautioned against giving the state control over grizzlies, after Republicans including Gianforte have advanced policies that make it much easier to kill another controversial predator, the gray wolf.

“We don't believe that there should be hunting of these iconic, native carnivores,” said environmentalist John Horning with the group WildEarth Guardians. “I have no doubt the state would push it to the absolute limit so they could kill as many grizzlies as possible.”

The Fish and Wildlife Service had not received the state's request and had no immediate comment, spokesperson Joe Szuszwalak said.

Interior Secretary Deb Haaland, who oversees Fish and Wildlife Service, co-sponsored legislation while in Congress to increase protections for bears and reintroduce them on tribal lands. Haaland declined to say how she would approach the issue when questioned during her February confirmation hearings.

A legal petition to lift protections across northern Montana will be filed following a Dec. 14 meeting of state wildlife commissioners, said Fish, Wildlife and Parks spokesperson Greg Lemon. The commission would be in charge of any future hunting season for grizzlies.

As many as 50,000 grizzlies once ranged the western half of the U.S. Most were killed by hunting, trapping and habitat loss following the arrival of European settlers in the late 1800s. Populations had declined to fewer than 1,000 bears by the time they were given federal protections in 1975.

Montana held grizzly hunts until 1991 under an exemption to the federal protections that allowed 14 bears to be killed each fall.

Protections were removed for more than 700 bears in and around Yellowstone National Park in 2017, but later restored by a federal judge.

Wyoming Gov. Mark Gordon said in September he will ask the federal government to remove protections for Yellowstone region grizzlies and permit the region’s three states to manage and potentially allow hunting of the big bruins in certain areas.

___

Follow Matthew Brown on Twitter: @MatthewBrownAP

Matthew Brown, The Associated Press

Federal Court Halts Illegal Logging in 

Endangered Grizzly Habitat in NW Montana

BY MIKE GARRITYFacebook

TwitterRedditEmail

Photo: Glen Phillips.

On May 25, a federal district court in Montana halted a large-scale industrial logging project in endangered grizzly bear habitat in northwestern Montana.  The Alliance for the Wild Rockies requested the preliminary injunction to protect the small, isolated, and imperiled Cabinet-Yaak grizzly bear population from further harm.

The Ripley logging project authorized almost 17 square miles of commercial logging (10,854 acres) on publicly-owned National Forest lands, including roughly five square miles of clearcuts (3,223 acres).  The project also authorized the construction of 30 miles of new logging roads, as well as reconstruction of 93 miles of logging roads.  By the U.S. Forest Service’s own estimate, the project would cost federal taxpayers $643,000 to implement because the receipts from the commercial timber sales do not cover the cost of the ecological remediation necessary after the project.

The federal court found that the project is most likely illegal because the government did not analyze the cumulative impacts on grizzly bears from logging on public lands, state lands, and private lands all at the same time.  Roads pose the biggest threat to grizzly bears, followed by logging and habitat removal.  And the Cabinet-Yaak grizzly population in particular is in bad shape.  The most recent actual count of grizzlies (published in 2021 for the 2020 monitoring year) for this population is 45 bears.  The prior year counted 50 bears, and the year before that counted 54 bears.  However, the government’s own Grizzly Bear Recovery Plan requires 100 bears for the minimum viable population.

The Cabinet-Yaak grizzly population is also failing every recovery target and goal: it is failing the target for females with cubs; it is failing the target for distribution of females with cubs; it is failing the female mortality limit (which is 0 mortalities until a minimum of 100 bears is reached); and it is failing the mortality limit for all bears (also 0 mortalities until a minimum of 100 bears is reached).

A 2016 peer-reviewed, published scientific research paper, Kendall et al. (2016), analyzed the Cabinet-Yaak grizzly population in detail based on extensive and systematic DNA collection in the region and found: “In the small Cabinet and Yaak populations, the difference between growth and decline is 1 or 2 adult females being killed annually or not.”  Humans killed two female Cabinet-Yaak grizzly bears in 2020.

Kendall et al. 2016 further found: “the small size, isolation, and inbreeding documented by this study demonstrate the need for comprehensive management designed to support [Cabinet-Yaak Ecosystem] population growth and increased connectivity and gene flow with other populations.”

Consistent with these serious concerns about the potential extirpation of the Cabinet-Yaak grizzly, the court held: “the [Cabinet-Yaak Ecosystem] population of grizzly bears is especially vulnerable.”  The court further explained that the government had relied on “knowingly false assumptions,” had “grossly misstate[d] the applicable law,” and had engaged in “evidentiary sandbagging” in the case.

The court ultimately held:  “Plaintiff is likely to succeed in proving that [the government’s] decision to not attempt to obtain and disclose data concerning reasonably certain State and private activities, and the agencies’ decision to rely on a factual assumption they know to be incorrect in assessing the Project’s cumulative effects on the grizzly bear, violated the ESA and were arbitrary and capricious.”

This win is a great victory for the Cabinet-Yaak grizzlies.  But this case is not over.  It will take a lot of hard work and money to protect this victory.  Please consider donating to support our decades-long commitment to saving the Cabinet-Yaak grizzly bear.

Mike Garrity is the executive director of the Alliance for the Wild Rockies.

Cattle Grazing = Death Traps for Yellowstone

 Grizzly Bears

BY MIKE GARRITYFacebookTwitter

RedditEmail

Scientists estimate 46,500 -72,200 grizzly bears ranged over a million square miles of the West when European settlers showed up more than two centuries ago. Today about 1550 grizzly bears occupy only 3% of their former range in five demographically isolated populations in the Northern Rockies that face threats of inbreeding.

Grizzly bears were listed as “threatened” in the lower 48 states under the Endangered Species Act in 1975 – nearly a half century ago. The Endangered Species Act exists for one reason: to protect and recover threatened and endangered species until they are no longer vulnerable to current and foreseeable threats.

One of the major hurdles for grizzly bear recovery is to have one connected, genetically sound population – not five isolated inbred populations.  Due to the physical disconnect from other populations, the Yellowstone grizzlies remain vulnerable to inbreeding and continue to require the legal protections of the Endangered Species Act.

As the range of grizzlies expands, the most promising corridor for reconnecting Yellowstone’s bears with other populations is the area including and surrounding the Beartooth-Absaroka Wilderness Area on Yellowstone National Park’s northern border.

And that’s where the problem comes in – and why the Alliance for the Wild Rockies and seven other conservation groups recently sent a 60-day Notice of Intent to Sue the Forest Service and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service over the decision to renew and expand the East Paradise cattle grazing allotments.  Simply put, sticking cattle in grizzly habitat has one predictable result – a death sentence for the grizzlies.

The East Paradise decision also moves up the cattle grazing season from July 1 to June 1, virtually ensuring the cows and new calves will run into grizzly bears that are hungry after hibernating all winter.  Traditionally, grizzlies stalk early season elk and deer calves for an easy meal.  But now, thanks to this reckless public lands grazing decision, hungry grizzlies will also find cattle calves as another easy meal.

Calves account for almost all grizzly bear depredation and the younger the calf, the greater the odds of falling victim to these predators—with peak vulnerability up to 5 months old.  Depredation is virtually guaranteed if cattle are left unattended for weeks on end as they are in the East Paradise and many other grazing allotments.

It is not like we have a shortage of threatened or endangered cows!  Montana has an estimated 2.6 million cows – 1,733 cows for every one of the estimated 1500 grizzlies scattered over the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem and the rest of Montana.  As historic foods such as highly nutritious whitebark pine nuts and Yellowstone cutthroat trout decline due to climate change and the planting of non-native fish, grizzly bears are expanding their range and eating more meat – and are now at greater risk of being killed as they conflict with humans and livestock in a desperate search for food.

Although most human-caused grizzly mortalities occur near roads through poaching, mis-identification by black bear hunters, and collisions, when bears hassle cattle, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services is called in to kill them. In the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem, Fish and Wildlife reports that from 1980 to 2001 of the 191 total grizzly mortalities, 82% or 156 were human caused mortalities.  Of these 156 killed grizzlies, nine bears were killed to protect livestock interests.

From 2002 to 2020, however, the numbers jumped significantly.  Of the 563 grizzlies that died 86% or 483 were killed by humans.  Of these 483 grizzlies killed by people, 122 bears were killed to protect livestock – more than one in four!  In Wyoming’s Upper Green River grazing allotments on the south side of Yellowstone the Fish and Wildlife Services recently authorized killing 72 grizzly bears over 10 years to protect cattle.

We’re giving the Forest Service 60 days to reconsider their grazing decision and do the right thing for America’s grizzly bear recovery efforts.  The agency should simply retire these grazing allotments that are enticing grizzly bears into death traps with an easy meal and restore the native vegetation that’s been battered by livestock to provide healthy, secure habitat so grizzly bears can safely move between Yellowstone and other ecosystems.

But if the Forest Service decides to go ahead with their ill-advised grazing leases, we will take them to federal court. We’d greatly appreciate your help in doing everything possible to attain safe travel corridors and the highest level of security for bears by retiring grazing allotment death traps for grizzly bears.

Mike Garrity is the executive director of the Alliance for the Wild Rockies.

Save Our Grizzly Bears

In Alberta the government continues to allow the sport hunting of these endangered animals, for no good reason except it brings in big bucks for some outfitter pals of King Ralph. Of course humans are responsible for their decline, we are their only natural enemies. And as the government allows for recreational expansion into the wilderness, their territory is threatened. And they will come in contact with humans who insist on colonizing the wilderness for their 'enjoyment'.


Humans leading cause of death for grizzlies, report finds
Last Updated Mon, 11 Jul 2005 19:31:41 EDT
CBC News

The main cause of death for grizzlies living in the Rockies is their interaction with humans, an 11-year study into the bears' population trends has found.

The Eastern Slopes Grizzly Bear Project tracked bears living in the Banff and Kananaskis areas for more than a decade. Only one-quarter of female grizzlies and just over 10 per cent of male grizzlies die of natural causes, the study's authors found.

Human interaction, either directly or indirectly, is the main cause of death, Stephen Herrero, a professor of environmental design with the University of Calgary, said. Alberta has closed trails this summer to protect people from grizzly bear attacks.

Their habitat is being eroded, the bears are getting hit by cars, they're hunted – both legally and illegally – and when the animals become a serious enough problem in an area they're either shot or moved to another location.

As well, researchers found the annual birth-rate for bears in Banff and Kananaskis is the lowest in North America. Grizzlies are being driven from their most productive habitats and are, literally, eating garbage.

Poor nutrition is a contributing factor to the low birth rate, the report's authors said. When bears live so close to people, it's easier for them to dine at the local dump than in alpine meadows, the researchers said. Herrero advocates programs to address food and garbage attractants to prevent grizzlies from getting into trouble.

He's also in favour of having the bears' status changed to "threatened" in Alberta. The change would mean no hunting, and greater restrictions on road construction in grizzly habitat.

"Grizzly bear hunting can be maintained sustainably, but it can only be maintained sustainably if we put it in a context of addressing all the other causes of mortality," he said.

No it can't. There should be no bear hunting period. As Liberal opposition critic Bill Bonko has said:Liberal Critic Calls for Greater Protection for Grizzly Habitat

It's up to governments to decide what price they're willing to pay to make sure grizzlies survive in the Rocky Mountains, such as closing recreational trails for a few days or shutting off large tracts of land from oil and gas activity, forestry, coal mining or other industry, he said.

That's a cop out, the Klein government will take industrial development over protecting wildlife any day. That's why they opened up Kananaskis in the first place, for the Winter games and a golf course. Yep get out and enjoy the wilderness while putting around.

"Bears are under more pressure now than ever," agreed Nigel Douglas of the Alberta Wilderness Association. "We're sort of pushing and pushing and pushing the places where bears live. And some time we need to start saying enough's enough, and we need to take a step back and leave some room for the bears."

* FROM JULY 6, 2005: Alberta closes trails to keep people away from bears

Last week, the province moved to close a number of trails in provincial parks around Canmore and Kananaskis, saying they wanted to keep people away from bear habitats.

A Canmore woman was killed in early June when she was attacked by a grizzly while out running near a golf course.

Yes she was running in an area that had been blocked off due to the fact that Grizzly bears were out and about in the area. Being arrogant she and her friends ignored the signs and the result was she was killed. Being a young bruin the bear didn't know that the golf course was off limits.

The province said the decision to close the trails and allow them to grow over was not triggered by the mauling death of a jogger last month. On June 5, Isabelle Dube was running with two friends near the Silver Tip Golf Course in Canmore when they encountered a grizzly. Her friends backed away, while Dube, a 36-year-old mother of two, climbed a tree. When wildlife officers reached the scene, Dube had been killed. Those who knew her said Dube, a competitive mountain biker, would not want to see the trails closed.The province said 200 kilometres of trails in parks in the Canmore area will remain open for walkers, runners and cyclists.

As usual some of the community expressed the speciesism that given a choice between humans and bears they supported humans being stupid. Like those who still insist it is their god given right to trespass in Grizzly territory, for their Olympic aspirations, and their Olympian egos.

What part of Wild in Wilderness don't these little colonialists understand?

Not all of the citizens in Canmore are anti-bear, there is a campaign going on to actually make Canmore bear friendly.

Was killer Canmore handled properly?

The headline in today’s (June 7, 2005) Calgary Herald – “Was the killer bear handled properly?” – only hints at the complexity of factors that led to the tragic deaths of Isabelle Dubé and Bear #99 last Sunday. The real question, and answer, may rely less on handling bears than it does on handling people and human development.

And of course as a result of ignoring the warning that the trail was closed, resulted in the useless death of the Grizzly. Why, cause he was being a wild animal of course. And not a particulary aggressive one. But he got killed for having reacted to something these humans did, including being where they should not have been.

A wildlife officer, accompanied by one of the women, returned to the site of the attack, where the officer killed the bear with a single shot.
Bear relocated in May
Fish and Wildlife officials said the 90-kilogram, four-year-old male bear had been captured and moved out of the area at the end of May, after continually visiting the golf course and after it approached a woman. The woman and her small dog backed away slowly and the bear left.The bear was relocated not because of any aggressive behaviour, but as a way of discouraging it from approaching populated areas, said Ealey. With wildlife officers tracking it, the bear travelled from Banff National Park back to the Canmore area – about 15 kilometres over rugged terrain – in a few days.Ealey said the bear hadn't shown any aggressive behaviours since it returned. "The bear was not aggressive, it behaved as a bear its typical age and sex would," Ealey said when asked why the bear hadn't been moved farther away. The grizzly was kept within its home range, Ealey added. Dube was the first person killed by a bear in Alberta since 1998.

The grizzly that killed Dube. (photo: Craig Douce, Rocky Mountain Outlook)



As Bonko points out the problem is colonialist expansion in the Rockies;
"Bonko is concerned that the incursion of industrial development into natural habitat areas is driving grizzlies from their natural homes into human-populated areas, increasing the possibility of incidents between humans and grizzlies.

“It’s this government’s policies that have allowed for large-scale industrial development into these natural areas,” said Bonko. “The government now needs to take the responsible, proactive approach and set some guidelines to ensure our natural areas and our wildlife are not endangered by unsustainable human activity.”

A recent study conducted by a wildlife biologist at the U of A in the Bow Valley area indicates wildlife corridors constructed to reduce the impact of development on grizzlies have failed to control human-grizzly contact.

Bonko said the government needs to come up with a better solution for reducing the possibility of human-grizzly contact in places like Canmore, where unrestrained development has led to increased contact between humans and grizzlies.

“The government continues to favour industrial development over the protection of wildlife habitat,” said Bonko. “Unrestrained development with little to no protection for wildlife species will inevitably lead to the extinction of our threatened species.”

Grizzly's aren't as cute as cuddly seals, so the Green NGO's won't being using them as the poster child for their activism. Grizzlies can fight back and the Green NGO's like helpless victims for their fund raising campigns. The Save the Grizzly campaigns have been a mere whimper in comparison to the sturm and drang raised over the seal hunt. Lets see 700 bears vs. 300,000 seals which do you think will become extinct first?

Liberal MLA Bonko followed up on my suggestion on how we can challenge the Grizzly hunt;

Liberal SRD Critic Encourages Grizzly Bear Lovers to Get Hunting Licenses

01 March 2005
Edmonton – Alberta Liberal Sustainable Resource Development critic Bill Bonko is urging all Albertans concerned with protecting the grizzly bear population in Alberta to join him in entering the draw to receive a grizzly bear hunting license this Thursday.

Bonko wants thousands of grizzly bear lovers to enter the draw in the hopes that they receive the licenses and quickly destroy them upon receipt. The government has approved the issuing of 73 licenses for this year despite repeated warnings from their own scientists, as well as conservation groups, warning the government the grizzly bear population in Alberta should not be subject to another hunt.

”If every Albertan who expressed an interest in saving the grizzly bear population entered the draw for a license, the chances of an actual bear hunter receiving one would be greatly diminished,” said Bonko. “If the government refuses to save the grizzly bear population in this province, then this is what we need to do.”

Bonko has made repeated calls for the government to immediately suspend the grizzly bear hunt and implement a recovery strategy to ensure that the number of grizzly bears reaches an acceptable level.

It costs $3.25 to enter the draw for the license and $48.50 to receive the license if selected. Bonko thinks that is a small price to pay to help protect the grizzly bear population in Alberta. ”To mark the price of a grizzly bear’s life at $50 is nominal,” said Bonko. “It is a small price to pay to keep a priceless member of Alberta’s wildlife alive.”

The deadline to enter the grizzly bear license draw is at the end of business hours on Thursday, March 3. You can enter the draw at specified sporting goods and registrations outlets.

Fifty Bucks to kill a Grizzly, Fifty Bucks, is that all? That's disgraceful when you consider what outfitters charge to profit off the kill. $50 and you can help save the Grizzly. Get a license and don't use it. And while you are at it donate another $50 to Save the Grizzly Campaign.

And the reasons the government gives for allowing the hunting of an endangered species?

David Coutts’ Top 8 reasons to continue the grizzly hunt

5. Hunting harvest provides information about bears (e.g., data on distribution and age).

6. Hunting maintains a knowledgeable group of people who are strong advocates for Alberta's grizzly population.

7. Hunters, through licence fees, contribute financially to conservation and management of grizzlies.

8. There is a long-standing hunting tradition and a high demand.

Oh right kill the bears and be advocates for them thats rich, provide information on them, how about just tagging them, your $5o contributes to conservation...right....and finally there is a hunting tradition, really I thought Alberta was all about farming and resource extraction, and high demand, yeah from whom?

Spring grizzly hunt claims 10 bears in Alberta -- six more than last year

Ten grizzly bears were shot and killed during Alberta's controversial spring hunt, according to new statistics. Of the 10 bears killed in the April 1 to May 31 hunt, six were males and four were females. That compares to six grizzlies killed in the 2004 spring hunt and 18 the year before. "It's not as bad as some previous years, but it's still 10 bears out of a pretty small population, so that's a big concern," said Nigel Douglas, conservation specialist with the Alberta Wilderness Association. There are about 700 grizzly bears in Alberta. Officials with the Alberta Fish and Game Association say that this spring's harvest shows hunters are not having a major impact on the population.

Aha, the Grizzly hunt is supported by the AFGA, which posts a picture of a big horn sheep and a bear on the front page of their website. Not deer, or other wild animal that can be used for food, but sport hunting/trophy hunting animals, a big horn and a bear. They claim of course that the bears like other wildlife are a 'natural resource', a commodity by any other name. And that their hunting is a cull that helps stabilize the Grizzly population.

14,000 hunters and fishermen can't be wrong, right? After all they are only 0.01% of the provincial population. That's hardly heavy demand.Especially since not all of them hunt, or hunt Grizzly. We wouldn't want to spoil their fun hunting for sport not food. Which is what bear hunting is. Hmmm I wonder if we culled the hunters what they would say about it being an effective way of conserving their population.

AFGA also promotes the hunting of other endangered species such as black bears, foxes and wolves. In Alberta you don't need to be a trained to hunt.

Not all first time hunters are required to successfully complete a Hunter Education Course in order to be eligible to hold a recreational hunting licence in Alberta. A person may be eligible because they have held a licence authorizing recreational hunting in Alberta or elsewhere, or may have passed the first time hunter test, or may be a non-resident (Canadian) or non-resident alien who is exempt from these requirements if they are hunting with a licenced guide or hunter host.
Government response to AGFA resolution on hunter eductation.

Hansard March 3, 2005

Grizzly Bear Hunt

Mr. Bonko: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Today marks the deadline for applications to be included in the random draw for the spring grizzly bear hunt to commence this April. This hunt is being continued despite the warnings of the government’s own grizzly bear recovery team as well as the warnings of conservation groups which call for the spring bear hunt to be postponed due to the low numbers of grizzly bears in Alberta. To the Minister of Sustainable Resource Development: why is this government refusing to listen to the findings of their own experts and allowing the grizzly bear hunt to continue?

Cause it's a one party state and they can do what they want to, do what they want to they want to. Why the Alberta government won’t protect its grizzly bears

STOP BEAR HUNTING

Biden administration may lift some protections for grizzlies, opening door to hunting

Montana, Wyoming and Idaho want federal protections lifted so they can regain management of grizzly bears and offer hunts to the public.
(Jim Urquhart / Associated Press)

BY MATTHEW BROWN
ASSOCIATED PRESS

FEB. 3, 2023 

BILLINGS, Mont. —

The Biden administration took a first step Friday toward ending federal protections for grizzly bears in the northern Rocky Mountains, which would open the door to hunting in Montana, Wyoming and Idaho.

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service said state officials provided “substantial” information that grizzlies have recovered from the threat of extinction in the regions surrounding Yellowstone and Glacier national parks.

But federal officials rejected claims by Idaho that protections should be lifted beyond those areas and raised concerns about new laws from the Republican-led states that could potentially harm grizzly populations.

“We will fully evaluate these and other potential threats,” said Martha Williams, director of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

Friday’s move kicks off at least a year of study before final decisions are made about the Yellowstone and Glacier regions.

The states want protections lifted so they can regain management of grizzlies and offer hunts to the public. As grizzly populations have expanded, more of the animals have moved into areas occupied by people, creating public safety issues and problems for farmers. State officials have insisted that future hunts would be limited and would not endanger the overall grizzly population.


Long portrayed as a villain, the coyote is gaining a flicker of respect

After grizzlies temporarily lost their protections in the Yellowstone region several years ago, Wyoming and Idaho scheduled hunts that would have allowed fewer than two dozen bears to be killed in the initial season. In Wyoming, almost 1,500 people applied for 12 grizzly bear licenses in 2018 before the hunt was blocked in federal court. About a third of the applicants came from out of the state. Idaho issued just one grizzly license before the hunt was blocked.

Republican lawmakers in the region in recent years also adopted more aggressive policies against gray wolves, including loosened trapping rules that could lead to grizzlies being inadvertently killed.

As many as 50,000 grizzlies once roamed the western half of the U.S. They were exterminated in most of the country early in the last century by over-hunting and trapping, and the last hunts in the northern Rockies occurred decades ago. There are now more than 2,000 bears in the lower 48 states and much larger populations in Alaska, where hunting is allowed.



The species’ expansion in the Glacier and Yellowstone areas has led to conflicts, including periodic bear attacks on livestock and the fatal mauling of humans.

Montana Gov. Greg Gianforte welcomed the administration’s announcement and said it could lead to the state reclaiming management of a species that was placed under federal protection in 1975. He said the grizzly’s recovery “represents a conservation success.”

Montana held grizzly hunts until 1991 under an exemption to the federal protections that allowed 14 bears to be killed each fall.

The federal government in 2017 sought to remove protections for the Yellowstone ecosystem’s grizzlies under former President Trump. The hunts in Wyoming and Idaho were set to begin when a judge restored protections, siding with environmental groups that said delisting wasn’t based on sound science.

Those groups want federal protections kept in place and no hunting allowed so bears can continue to move into new areas.


California used to pay people to hunt mountain lions. Now we spend millions to protect them

“We should not be ready to trust the states,” said attorney Andrea Zaccardi of the Center for Biological Diversity.

Dave Evans, a hunting guide with Wood River Ranch in Meeteetse, Wyo., said the issue is complex, and he can understand why people fall on both sides of the debate.

“You have so many opinions, and some of them are not based on science, but the biologists are the ones that know the facts about what the populations are and what should be considered a goal for each area,” Evans said. “If you’re going to manage grizzly bears, there’s a sustainable number that needs to be kept in balance. I’m not a biologist, but I would follow the science.

U.S. government scientists have said the region’s grizzlies are biologically recovered but in 2021 decided that protections were still needed because of human-caused bear deaths and other pressures. Bears considered to be problematic are regularly killed by wildlife officials.

Demand for hunting licenses would likely be high if the protections are lifted, Evans said.

“You would definitely have a higher demand, and it would probably be very expensive,” Evans said. “A guided bear hunt in Alaska can start around $20,000, so I would imagine it would be very sought-after.”

A decision on the states’ petitions was long overdue. Idaho Gov. Brad Little on Thursday filed notice that he intended to sue over the delay. Idaho’s petition was broader than the one filed by Montana and sought to lift protections nationwide. That would have included small populations of bears in Idaho, Montana and Washington state, where biologists say the animals have not yet recovered to sustainable levels. It also could have prevented the return of bears to the North Cascades and other areas.

In an emailed statement, Little said the decision was “seven months late.” Under the Endangered Species Act, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is supposed to issue a finding within 90 days, to the extent that is practical. That deadline arrived last June, the governor’s office said.

“While we continue to evaluate the decision from USFWS, this is another example of federal overreach and appears to have a disproportionate impact on North Idaho,” Little wrote. He said his office would “continue to push back against the federal government.”

Grizzly bear encounters are rare in northern Idaho, though wildlife managers occasionally warn people to be on the watch. In 2021, Idaho Fish and Game officials estimated that there were 40 to 50 grizzly bears in the northernmost part of the state.

Scientists Found the Oldest Known Grizzly Bear in Yellowstone

Scientists found a 34-year-old grizzly bear in southwest Wyoming, identifying him by a mark on his lip made by biologists in 1989. That’s the oldest grizzly ever known in the Yellowstone region that includes parts of Montana, Idaho, and Wyoming. Respect your elders.

© Photo: Jim Urquhart, File (AP) A grizzly bear roams near Yellowstone National Park.

There’s no telling if there are older grizzly bears currently roaming Yellowstone, since hundreds of the creatures are completely unmarked by scientists. But this one is by far the oldest one on whom there is scientific documentation.

Sadly, though, biologists had to put the bear down. He was captured last summer after he got caught preying on calves on nearby ranches. After euthanizing the creature last July, biologists found an identifying tattoo on its lip that read 168—a mark given to the creature in 1989.

This Is Alex, the First Antarctic Penguin Born in Mexico

The bear was a male, which is notable, as female grizzlies generally live longer than males. Previously, the oldest known grizzly in Yellowstone was bear 399, a female who died at 27.

When caught, 168 had just three teeth left, and they were ground down to nubs—a sure sign of old age, and an explanation for why the animal was going after easy prey like calves. He was also quite emaciated, weighing in at just 170 pounds (77 kilograms), which is nothing for a grizzly. When he was captured in the Shoshone National Forest in August 1991, records show he weighed 450 pounds (204 kilograms). 

© Photo: Zach Turnbull/Wyoming Game and Fish Department (AP) This 2020 photo provided by the Wyoming Game and Fish Department shows the worn, mostly toothless jaw of Grizzly 168. The grizzly was the oldest documented in the Yellowstone region. Bear biologists euthanized the 34-year-old grizzly due to its poor health.

Yellowstone biologists consider grizzlies’ bodily health based on a 1-to-5 scale, with 1 being in the worst shape and 5 being the worst. When he was captured, 168 was rated a zero. Because of his failing physical condition, Fish and Wildlife Service biologists made the call to euthanize the animal last July instead of relocating him to a more remote part of Yellowstone.

“It was sad that we had to put him down, but ethically there was nothing else that could be done, Dan Thompson, a biologist with Wyoming Game and Fish told the Jackson Hole News and Guide. Pour one out.

Researchers know quite a bit about the bear from past records. Grizzly 168 was first captured when he was three years old—that’s when scientists gave him his identifying tattoo—and then captured again in Fremont County, Wyoming in spring 1996. Over the next year, he lost his radio collar, so scientists aren’t totally sure what he was up to, but DNA tests show that he likely fathered three kids in the mid-2000s, and may have had some more kids in later years when he was 23 and again when he was 31.

Conditions are hard for grizzlies, which makes 168's life all the more remarkable. There are only 1,800 grizzlies left in the contiguous U.S., including roughly 700 in Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem. That’s just a small fraction of the 50,000 who roamed the land before Anglo-Americans colonized the West in the 1800s. The bears have faced pressure due to threats including hunting and habitat degradation. Climate change has increasingly played a role since the bears rely on seeds and berries for nutrition and fattening up for winter hibernation as well as reproduction season. Rising temperatures have increased the likelihood of droughts that can curtail fall seed crops. Research on Alberta grizzlies also found that certain berry crops could pop up earlier in the year, creating a what’s called a “phenological mismatch” for bears need the nutrients the most.

Despite the risks, it’s not all bad news for grizzlies. The creatures’ numbers have been increasing since they were given federal protection in the 1970s, with the Yellowstone population rebounding from just over 100 in the 1970s. Fish and Wildlife Service removed Yellowstone grizzlies from the Endangered Species List in 2017, but they were placed back under the federal protections after a court ruling last year. So hopefully, 168's kids will have a shot at a bright future.

Scientists: Grizzlies expand turf but still need protection

The bears now occupy about 6% of their historical range in the contiguous U.S., up from 2% in 1975.

BILLINGS, Mont. — Grizzly bears are slowly expanding the turf where they roam in parts of the northern Rocky Mountains but need continued protections, according to government scientists who concluded that no other areas of the country would be suitable for reintroducing the fearsome predators.

© Provided by The Canadian Press

The Fish and Wildlife Service on Wednesday released its first assessment in almost a decade about the status of grizzly bears in the contiguous U.S. The bruins are shielded from hunting as a threatened species except in Alaska.

BOTH PARKS BORDER ON CANADA BEARS KNOW NO BORDERS
Grizzly populations grew over the past 10 years in two areas — the Yellowstone region of Wyoming, Montana and Idaho, with more than 700 bears; and around Glacier National Park in Montana, which is home to more than 1,000 of the animals.

Grizzly numbers remain low in other parts of the Northern Rockies, and scientists said their focus is on bolstering those populations rather than reintroducing them elsewhere in the country.

The bears now occupy about 6% of their historical range in the contiguous U.S., up from 2% in 1975.

Conservationists and some university scientists have pushed to return bears to areas including Colorado’s San Juan Mountains and California’s Sierra Nevada.

The 368-page assessmen t makes no recommendation on the topic, but scientists looked at the possibility of bears in more areas as part of an examination of their remaining habitat.

That analysis showed grizzlies would be unable to sustain themselves in the San Juans, the Sierra Nevada or two other areas -- Utah’s Uinta Mountains and New Mexico’s Mongollon Mountains.

“They were looking for areas that could sustain grizzly bears as opposed to areas that would continuously need for humans to drop bears in there,” said Hilary Cooley, the Fish and Wildlife Service's grizzly bear recovery co-ordinator.

In each case, officials said, bears would face the same challenge — not enough remote, protected public lands, high densities of humans and little chance of connecting with other bears populations to maintain healthy populations.

An estimated 50,000 grizzlies once inhabited western North America from the Pacific Ocean to the Great Plains. Hunting, commercial trapping and habitat loss wiped out most by the early 1900s. The bears were last seen in California in the 1920s and the last known grizzly in Colorado was killed by an elk hunter in 1979.

Grizzly bears have been protected as a threatened species in the contiguous U.S. since 1975, allowing a slow recovery in a handful of areas. An estimated 1,900 live in the Northern Rockies of Wyoming, Montana, Idaho and Washington state.

The Center for Biological Diversity sued the Fish and Wildlife Service in 2019 in a bid to force officials to consider restoring grizzlies to parts of seven more western states. A U.S. District judge ruled last year that the government was not compelled to draft recovery plans for the bears in new areas.

Protections for bears in the Yellowstone region were lifted under former President Donald Trump but later restored under a court order just as Idaho and Wyoming prepared to hold public hunts for grizzlies for the first time in decades. Five Republican U.S. senators from the region this week introduced legislation to strip protection from Yellowstone-area bears and put them under state jurisdiction.

Wyoming Sen. John Barrasso said in a statement that President Joe Biden's administration had missed an opportunity Wednesday to declare restoration efforts in the region a success and lift protections.

Biologists say Yellowstone grizzlies are “biologically-recovered." But an appeals court last year said the government had not done enough to make sure hunting and other pressures don’t reduce the population size in the future to where the bears’ genetic health could be harmed.

Centre for Biological Diversity attorney Andrea Zaccardi said state officials, hunting groups and the agriculture industry had too much influence on decisions about bears made under Trump. She urged officials under Biden to take a “less politically-motivated look at grizzly bear recovery.”

Wyoming ranchers who want grizzlies under state control sided with the government in the legal dispute over where bears should be restored. They would oppose any attempt by the new administration to reverse course, said Will Trachman with Mountain States Legal Foundation, which represents the ranchers.

“We hope they won't roll over on their own victory,” he said.

Interior Secretary Deb Haaland, who oversees Fish and Wildlife Service, co-sponsored legislation while in Congress to increase protections for bears and reintroduce them on tribal lands. Haaland declined to say how she would approach the issue when questioned during her February confirmation hearings.

“I imagine at the time I was caring about the bears,” she said.

Matthew Brown, The Associated Press

What’s next for grizzly bears in Idaho, surrounding states? Managers say it’s complicated



Rob Chaney
Wed, June 23, 2021, 5:00 AM·4 min read

To understand the “Interagency” in the Interagency Grizzly Bear Committee, consider Bear 863.

Also known as Felicia, Felicity or the Togwotee Sow, this female grizzly has been a roadside attraction on Highway 26 east of Grand Teton National Park for several years. This spring, so many tourists have stopped along the road to watch and photograph her that both the bear and people face safety risks.

But figuring out who can do what for whom isn’t obvious.

The confusion extends to social media. The website Change.org has gathered more than 40,000 petition signatures opposing presumed plans by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service for “murdering this bear and her two cubs.” The “let bears be bears” petition added 12 signatures in the time it took to write the previous sentence.

“The bear hasn’t done anything wrong, but it’s so visible, it’s causing traffic jams and people are not behaving appropriately,” FWS Grizzly Recovery Coordinator Hilary Cooley said at last week’s IGBC summer meeting. “The problem has gotten bigger as more and more people are coming over the pass to the parks. It’s a multi-agency response.”

Wyoming Game and Fish Department bear managers have primary jurisdiction of wildlife at Togwotee Pass, but grizzlies have threatened status under the federal Endangered Species Act, which ropes in Cooley’s office. The Wyoming state agency has gotten help from a Yellowstone National Park bear hazing specialist who’s halfway through a 14-day attempt to discourage Bear 863 from the road corridor.

The Wyoming Highway Patrol does not have enough personnel to dedicate someone to all-day Togwotee Pass management, and Game and Fish wardens don’t have traffic violation jurisdiction. Grand Teton National Park as well as the Shoshone and Bridger-Teton national forests also have personnel trying to help.

“If nothing happens on day 15, we won’t swoop in with traps,” Cooley said. “We’ll evaluate and see what happens next. People believe we’re going to move in and kill her. We have no plans to do that unless something drastic changes with her behavior.”

Expanding grizzly populations, burgeoning tourist activity and increasing conflicts with livestock producers this year have the Interagency Grizzly Bear Committee rethinking its work plan for the coming years. For example, a new requirement by the Montana State Legislature ordering the Department of Fish, Wildlife & Parks to pre-approve relocation sites for captured grizzly bears will set off a complex series of conversations with the Idaho Department of Fish and Game, which shares oversight of wildlife in the Bitterroot Grizzly Recovery Area on the Montana-Idaho border.

Moving bears into those mountains would also involve the IGBC subcommittees of the Bitterroot, Greater Yellowstone and Northern Continental Divide recovery areas, each of which encompasses a half-dozen or more agencies.

“We know bears are coming to the Bitterroot,” Montana FWP Wildlife Division Manager Ken McDonald said. “Our goal is to get ahead of them for once.”

The Montana Legislature passed several grizzly-management laws and resolutions aimed at getting the bears removed from federal Endangered Species Act protection and reducing penalties for killing them, McDonald said.

FWP advisers warned that such moves might actually make the U.S. Department of Interior less likely to delist the grizzly, he added.

“That was pretty much dismissed, based on the track record of not getting delisting,” McDonald said. “It didn’t have much weight, which is a message for all of us.”

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service tried twice, in 2007 and 2017, to delist grizzlies in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem around the intersection of Montana, Wyoming and Idaho. About 750 grizzlies inhabit that area, which includes 9,209 square miles of Yellowstone National Park, multiple national forests and private property.

Both efforts were rejected by federal court judges. And neither effort would have affected grizzlies in the other five recovery areas. The Northern Continental Divide Area has about 1,000 grizzlies, while the Cabinet-Yaak Area in northwest Montana and the Selkirk Area in northern Idaho each have about 50. The Bitterroot Area and North Cascades Area in Washington have no known resident grizzlies.

A recently completed review of grizzly recovery in the Lower 48 states found the bear needed to retain its ESA “threatened” status, in large part because of the struggling or non-existent populations in the smaller recovery areas, Cooley said.

“We have a new administration,” Cooley said, referring to the installation of new Department of Interior staff under President Joe Biden. “We’re still seeking guidance on what our next steps will be.”

Grizzlies once roamed the Cascades; some people want them to return

2023/11/29

Restoring grizzly bears to Washington’ s North Cascades is again under consideration. - Dreamstime/Dreamstime/TNS


LONG READ

STETATTLE CREEK, North Cascades — Bubbles tumbled and danced on the surface of this creek as stones interrupted the flow of the aquamarine water, once home to spring Chinook and steelhead, below the bank where Scott Schuyler and his daughter Janelle walked in early November.

Stetattle was derived from stəbtabəl' (stub-tahb-elh), or grizzly bear, in the Lushootseed language spoken by the Upper Skagit people who lived on these lands for at least 10,000 years.

But grizzlies haven't lived here for decades.

Today, federal agencies have offered up three potential plans for grizzlies' future in the North Cascades; two include reintroducing the bears to the area. Indigenous nations in support of the effort point to the bears' long-rooted history and human coexistence in the region that far predates European settlement. Other tribes have joined large landowners like ranchers in opposing the effort, arguing a return of the apex predator would threaten their current way of life.

"I've had conversations with friends who are avid hikers up and down the North Cascades and they have their strong opinions — they don't want bears encroaching on their recreational time," said Janelle Schuyler, a young member of the Upper Skagit Indian Tribe and an environmental activist who has led efforts to restore Skagit River salmon. "I just view it completely differently. We're in their homeland."

She envisions a future here where healthy salmon, bears and people again coexist.

But some worry that window has passed.

"We're advocating for the way of life we have currently," said Nino Maltos II, chair of the Sauk-Suiattle Indian Tribe. "We'd like to see more salmon, to bring those numbers back. But this is putting an obstacle in our everyday lives."

As debate ensues in the U.S., the bears could be reintroduced in the Canadian portions of the North Cascades as soon as next year and will almost certainly wander across the international border.

"Impossible to separate them"

Upper Skagit peoples' origin story says the transformer came to the upper reaches of the Skagit River, here in Stetattle Valley, made the conditions right to support the people and gifted the people with the ability to communicate with animals.

For thousands of years, Upper Skagit people followed networks of trails through dense, towering ancient cedars and Douglas fir to gather berries, roots and cedar bark through this valley.

A spear point, estimated to be up to 9,000 years old, was unearthed here in the North Cascades. This long-rooted history is also evident in the curling trunks of cedars where bark was harvested to make clothing, cooking baskets and fishing nets.

They would hunt mountain goats for food and use the wool for blankets. Deer and elk provided meat and the skins were made into clothing. And sometimes, they would hunt grizzlies. Upper Skagit people saw them as spiritual beings that conferred hunting prowess on those who possessed the bear's guardian spirit.

Grizzlies roamed much of the West before colonization. A keystone species, bears are known to till and aerate soil as they search for potato-like roots like Alpine sweetvetch, munch on berries, and later deposit the seeds through their scat. The omnivores love to snatch big, juicy salmon from the river and will steal kills from other predators.

In just over a century — the blink of an eye in geologic time — this land, and humans' relationship with it, was transformed. Settlers built the mighty Skagit into a machine river — dammed to allow people to control the stop and start of its flows — to serve electricity to populations more than 100 miles away. Salmon and oceangoing trout were severed from these pristine reaches of the river.

Over time, white settlers wiped the creek's namesake bears off the landscape, too. Beginning in the mid-1800s, they killed more than 3,000 for their pelts while miners and homesteaders killed countless others. The big brown bears, with a hump of heavy muscle in their shoulders, never bounced back.

No one knows how many grizzly bears remain. The last verified sighting in the U.S. North Cascades was more than two decades ago, and only two sightings have been verified on the British Columbia side of the mountains since.

Some of the best intact grizzly habitat still remains here. It includes vast protected wilderness, habitat for dens and hundreds of species of plants, animals and insects the bears feast on.

Scientists have found that under several climate change scenarios, future habitat quality remains the same or slightly improved in the North Cascades, offering enough to support up to 289 female bears. Projected declines in snowpack would result in a decrease in vegetation at the highest elevations, but an increase in grizzly bear foraging habitat in high-elevation meadows.

The bears' primary threat remains humans. Up to 85% of bear deaths across British Columbia, Alberta, Washington, Idaho and Montana have come from human action.

Upper Skagit people coexisted and coevolved with the bears for at least 10,000 years. Today, Scott Schuyler, a policy representative for the tribe who often leads negotiations on conservation efforts, and other Upper Skagit leaders are passionate advocates for plans to reintroduce the bears to the North Cascades.

"It's very powerful to be here in this area where our ancestors once lived," Schuyler said, as the Skagit River twisted and churned past the stone he balanced his boots on. "And hopefully again, we'll see restoration occur not only for the grizzly bear, but for the river, too."

"The tribe's history, culture and identity is so intertwined with Grizzly Bears and the [North Cascades Ecosystem] that it is impossible to separate them," Marilyn Scott, chair of the Upper Skagit, wrote to the National Park Service.

Some tribes — including Spokane, Kootenai, Coeur d'Alene, and the Confederated Tribes of the Colville Reservation — also consider the grizzly bear sacred, and in 2016 signed a treaty of solidarity aimed to protect and reintroduce grizzly bears across their historic range.

As the public comment period closed on three potential options for the bears' future this month, federal agencies are drawing up a final plan. It's slated to be presented this spring.

Under both reintroduction options outlined in the plan, about three to seven grizzly bears would be released into the North Cascades each year over the course of five to 10 years. The goal is to establish an initial population of 25 grizzly bears.

One option outlined in the plan would allow grizzly bears to be managed as a threatened species under the Endangered Species Act, and permit some to be captured, moved or killed only under specific circumstances, like the defense of life and scientific or research activities.

The second is looser and would allow landowners to call on the federal government to remove bears if they pose a threat to livestock, for instance.

"Where a lot of us live"

About 43 miles downstream, the 300-person Sauk-Suiattle Indian Tribe is nestled in the foothills of the North Cascades near the lumber town of Darrington and next to the Sauk River, where leaders waved from the grassy banks near their homes to fishermen paddling an inflatable boat.

The tribe has been vocal in opposition to the reintroduction of grizzlies.

"They love feasting on the spawning grounds," Chair Nino Maltos II said. "The spawning grounds happen to be right behind where a lot of us live."

The tribe has fought David-and-Goliath-esque court battles to challenge the lack of fish passage at Seattle City Light's dams on the Skagit River, and participated in efforts to restore dozens of acres of salmon habitat and to monitor and recover mountain goat and elk populations.

But in the case of the bears, members are advocating for their current way of life, Maltos said. The bears' return would feel like an additional obstacle to exercising their treaty rights — gathering berries, fishing and hunting — in the mountains, said Demi Maltos, who sits on the tribal council.

Things have changed a lot since the bears were functionally extirpated from the area. About two dozen mountain goats remain near Darrington, and six elk, according to Michael Grant, wildlife biologist for the tribe. Fish are in decline. So is the tribe's population.

"Pre-contact, we were 8,000 people," Sauk-Suiattle Councilmember Kevin Lenon said. "We are more endangered as a Native people than these apex predators."

Leaders are fearful of the bears reentering an ecosystem humans have since encroached on. They're nervous about living in the bears' backyards, and the risks of encounters while they exercise their treaty rights, though statistical chances cited in National Park Service data are low.

The small tribe isn't alone.

The Obama administration announced in August 2014 a three-year process to study grizzly reintroduction. In 2017, Department of the Interior officials, without clear explanation, halted progress on the recovery efforts.

The effort was reignited in 2018 by then-Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke and subsequently scrapped in a 2020 meeting in Omak, led by new Interior Secretary David Bernhardt with Rep. Dan Newhouse, R-Sunnyside, and leaders of agricultural groups alongside him.

Ranchers have been among the most vocal opponents along the way.

In 1993, they commandeered an infamously contentious public meeting in Okanogan County, where ranchers expressed concern about the risk of grizzly bear attacks on livestock. Thirty years later, Okanogan County residents expressed similar sentiments at a federal public meeting Oct. 30.

But this go at bringing the bears back, federal agencies are offering an option that would designate the bears as a nonessential experimental population and give agencies "greater management flexibility should conflict situations arise."

Under that designation, some of the rules under the Endangered Species Act are relaxed, creating potential for landowners to receive federal permission to kill or relocate a bear and avoid punishment if done accidentally in certain situations.

"They just can't recover on their own"

Meanwhile, just north of the U.S. border, the Okanagan Nation Alliance's efforts to recover the bears, known to the Syilx (silks) people as kiɁlawnaɁ (kee-law-naw), are underway.

About a decade ago, the Chiefs Executive Council declared grizzly bears endangered and protected in Syilx Territory, and mandated the Okanagan Nation Alliance to take recovery actions, particularly in the North Cascades. In 2018, they passed a resolution pledging to work with neighboring First Nations to recover the bears in Southwest British Columbia.

"The reality is, the normal for the landscape is to have grizzly bears on it," said Cailyn Glasser, Okanagan Nation Alliance natural resources manager. "It's not new. What's new and strange for that ecosystem is not having grizzlies for the last 50 or 70 years."

The connection between Syilx people and grizzlies goes back millennia, Glasser said in a phone call. Grizzly Bear is the caretaker of all of the resources on the landscape. People, like the bears, depend on huckleberries, and salmon and other shared resources. The bears are the stewards — their existence is imperative to the health of the ecosystem, Glasser said.

Okanagan Nation Alliance leaders have since worked with elders, knowledge keepers, hunters and gatherers from Syilx member communities to understand and preserve traditional knowledge about kiɁlawnaɁ, to better understand the species' habitat needs and begin work to preserve st̕xałq, or black huckleberry, that the bears rely on.

They will soon launch an education campaign centered on grizzlies' role on the landscape, and the history of humans' coexistence with other charismatic predators.

In the mid-1990s, about seven decades after the last wolf pack was killed in Yellowstone National Park, officials relocated 31 gray wolves from western Canada to the park. It was an effort championed by the National Park Service, Fish and Wildlife Service, researchers and environmental groups, and at the time received the largest number of public comments on any federal proposal — only to be challenged by grizzlies in the North Cascades.

From 1995 to 2003 officials found wolves preyed on livestock outside the park much less than expected, killing 256 sheep and 41 cattle. The wolves caused a "trophic cascade" of ecological change; the decrease in elk population helped increase beaver populations and bring back aspen and other vegetation.

The bears could be moved into the Canadian portion of the North Cascades Ecosystem as soon as next year, but it's recognized that partnership and collaboration with government partners, on both sides of the border, is important.

Glasser said Okanagan leaders hope to operate as a transboundary team alongside those leading the efforts in the U.S. They may not amend their plans based on what's happening south of the border, but leaders want to collaborate, if possible.

If the bears were to wander south across the international border — as they most certainly will — and establish a population before U.S. agencies establish their rule to provide management flexibility, the U.S. would lose that ability, said U.S. Fish & Wildlife spokesperson Andrew LaValle.

"On both sides of the border, grizzly bears were persecuted at a rate that decimated the population," Glasser said. "They just can't recover on their own."

© The Seattle Times

Map of the Cascade Range in the Pacific Northwest showing geographic locations, approximate extent of Western (tan) and High Cascades (purple), and the spatial relationships of some major structural features in Oregon. Note that the names Western Cascades and High Cascades are not used in Washington or south of Mount Shasta in California. The study area is shown by a red polygon in north-central Oregon. The numerals 1, 2, and 3 refer to the three segments of the High Cascades graben from south to north: 1) southern segment, 2) central segment, and 3) Hood River graben segment. Labels: BFZ -Brothers fault zone; BV -Boring Volcanic Field; EDFZEugene-Denio fault zone; HRF -Hood River fault zone; HCF -Horse Creek fault zone; GCF -Gales Creek fault; GRF -Green Ridge fault zone; PB -Portland Basin; PHF -Portland Hills fault; MCB -Middle Columbia Basin (orange outline); MHFZ -Mount Hood fault zone; MFZ -Mount McLoughlin fault zone; OWL -Olympic-Wallowa Lineament; SFZ -Sisters fault zone; SV -Simcoe Mountains; TB -Tualatin Basin; VFZ -Vale fault zone. Oregon physiographic provinces after Dicken (1965). Geologic provinces of Washington from the Washington Geological Survey (https://www.dnr.wa.gov/programs-and-services/geology/explore-popular-geology/geologic-provinceswashington).