Exposing the Big Game

Forget Hunters' Feeble Rationalizations and Trust Your Gut Feelings: Making Sport of Killing Is Not Healthy Human Behavior

Exposing the Big Game

Bear 148 hunter knew bear was wearing tracking collar before kill

‘This was a legal hunt and no investigation is underway,’ says B.C.
Conservation Officer Service

The Canadian Press Posted: Sep 28, 2017 3:56 PM MT Last Updated: Sep 28,
2017 6:07 PM MT

Bear 148, seen here in an undated handout photo, was killed Sunday in the
McBride region of British Columbia by a hunter with a guide.
<https://i.cbc.ca/1.4225888.1501252790!/fileImage/httpImage/image.jpg_gen/de
rivatives/16x9_620/bear-148-profile-20170727.jpg>

Related Stories

*
<http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/bear-148-killed-by-hunter-in-bc-1.431
0406> Famous Banff-area grizzly killed by hunter in B.C.
*
<http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/bear-148-profile-banff-grizzly-1.4225
839> Why Banff’s Bear 148 family history gives insight into the grizzly’s
uncertain future
*
<http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/plan-to-end-grizzly-trophy-h
unting-in-bc-announced-1.4247060> B.C. to pull plug on grizzly bear trophy
hunting
*
<http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/bear-148-relocated-grizzly-1.4229459>
Bear 148 moved from Bow Valley to remote area north of Jasper

The hunter that killed a notorious female grizzly bear in B.C. after the
bear wandered into the province from Alberta knew the animal was wearing a
research tracking collar but shot it anyway.

The Alberta government had moved the grizzly, known as Bear 148, in July
from its home range in a popular developed area west of Calgary to a remote
park north of Jasper to protect public safety.

.
<http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/bear-148-killed-by-hunter-in-bc-1.431
0406> Famous Banff-area grizzly killed by hunter in B.C.

The grizzly, which is a threatened species in Alberta, hadn’t hurt anyone
but had gotten too close to people too many times around the Canmore and
Banff area.

The B.C. Conservation Officer Service said the bear was shot on Sunday in
the McBride region by a non-resident hunter who was with a guide.

“The guide and hunter knew that the bear was collared prior to harvest,” the
service said in an email. “This was a legal hunt and no investigation is
underway.”

According to B.C.’s hunting and trapping guide, hunters are advised to not
avoid shooting tagged or collared animals, unless specified, to ensure
biologists get accurate data on mortality rates.

Hunters who kill a tagged animal are asked to report it.

No information on the hunter was given.

Bear closures
<https://i.cbc.ca/1.2684960.1506555569!/fileImage/httpImage/image.jpg_gen/de
rivatives/original_620/bear-closures.jpg>

Last month, B.C. announced it would end the grizzly bear trophy hunt as of
Nov. 30, saying it is inconsistent with the values of most British
Columbians.

Brett Boukall, a senior wildlife biologist with Alberta Environment, said
data from Bear 148’s tracking collar suggests the grizzly had not been a
problem before it was killed.

“It was kind of being the perfect bear doing bear things away from people,”
he said. “To my knowledge, there had been no reports of any conflicts.”

After the bear was relocated in July, it wandered around its new range in
the northern Alberta wilderness.

Bear crossed into B.C. Friday

The tracking data suggests it crossed into B.C. on Friday after a storm
dumped snow in the region, perhaps making it more difficult for it to find
food, Boukall said. It was wandering toward the Fraser River when it was
shot.

“Myself and my colleagues felt disappointed that this has occurred, but at
the same time recognized that this is something that is a part of being a
bear in today’s busy landscape with the ability for legal harvest on the
B.C. side,” he said.

Conservationists are concerned about the death of Bear 148, which was
nearing the age to have cubs.

* MORE BEAR NEWS |
<http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/griffith-woods-park-grizzly-park-clos
ure-wednesday-1.4310724> ‘If the bear wanted me . I’m the bear’s lunch’:
Jogger comes close enough to touch grizzly in Calgary park

Candace Batycki of the Yellowstone to Yukon Conservation Initiative said the
fact the bear had to be relocated from its home range in the highly
developed Bow Valley west of Calgary shows how difficult it is for grizzlies
to survive.

Batycki said more must be done to protect them.

“Bear 148 was not in a protected area when she was killed but she was in
grizzly bear habitat,” she said. “Her death highlights the need for
collaborative cross-border conversation between B.C. and Alberta.”

Bear death a case of bad timing

Alberta Environment Minister Shannon Phillips called the death of Bear 148 a
case of bad timing.

“The new government has not moved forward with their regulations yet because
they are new and the grizzly hunt remains legal across the border in British
Columbia.”

There are about 700 grizzly bears in Alberta. It has been illegal to hunt
grizzlies in the province since 2006.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/bear-148-tracking-collar-hunter-kill-1
.4312369

<http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/bear-148-tracking-collar-hunter-kill
1.4312369>

<http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/bear-148-tracking-collar-hunter-kill
1.4312369> Bear 148 hunter knew bear was wearing tracking collar before kill

http://www.cbc.ca

The hunter that killed a notorious female grizzly bear in B.C. after the
bear wandered into the province from Alberta knew the animal was wearing a
research tracking collar but shot it anyway.

Miley Cyrus joins call to close ‘loophole’ on grizzly bear hunt in B.C.

Popstar Miley Cyrus is back in B.C. politics, this time joining the call for a full ban on grizzly bear hunting.

This follows a decision from the BC NDP to stop the contentious grizzly bear trophy hunt in the province while allowing hunting for meat to continue.

READ MORE: Miley Cyrus visits B.C. to discuss wolf cull

But Cyrus, along with local conservation group Pacific Wild, says hunters are using that as a “loophole” and claiming they are hunting for food.

The campaign was released on Tuesday and it features the voice of the artist singing a chilling version of Teddy Bears’ Picnic over footage of an empty forest.

“Last year 300 grizzly bears were killed in B.C., let’s end the hunt before they’re gone,” reads the text at the end of the video.

WATCH: BC Greens says NDP plan to end trophy grizzly hunting isn’t a true ban

The Ministry of Forests, Lands, and Natural Resource Operations has estimated there are 15,000 grizzly bears in B.C., and that about 250 are killed each year.

“The grizzly bear is the second slowest reproducing land mammal in North America, one that’s threatened throughout much of its natural range and habitat,” said Executive Director at Pacific Wild, Ian McAllister, in a release.

READ MORE: B.C. NDP government stopping contentious grizzly bear trophy hunt

The statement says over 90 per cent of British Columbians want to see a complete end “to this barbaric hunt.”

The ban on trophy hunting will take effect on Nov. 30.

This isn’t the first time Cyrus has been involved with a campaign in B.C., back in 2015 while on a trip to B.C.’s Great Bear Rainforest, she spoke out against the province’s controversial wolf cull.

Cyrus asked her Instagram followers to sign a petition to stop the killings, gathering thousands of signatures.

Guide outfitters question trophy hunt ban

http://www.squamishchief.com/news/local-news/guide-outfitters-question-trophy-hunt-ban-1.22666395

New restrictions to the hunting of grizzlies leave hunters frustrated and confused

JOEL BARDE , PIQUE NEWSMAGAZINE / SQUAMISH CHIEF

guide outfitters association says that the province’s ban on hunting grizzlies for sport doesn’t make sense.

“It’s not about the bears,” said Scott Ellis, executive director of the Guide Outfitters Association of British Columbia (GOABC).

Ellis said that the ban — which will still allow for the hunting of grizzlies so long as the hunter harvests the bear’s meat — is about bowing to public opinion and the “whims of radicals,” rather than preserving grizzly bear populations.

Ellis said that the grizzly population in B.C. is stable, at around 15,000 bears, and that the current hunt is sustainable. “We’re seeing more bears in higher density, and we’re seeing bigger bears, and we’re seeing bears where we’ve never seen them before,” he said, adding that an average of two per cent of the total population — 300 grizzlies — is killed on an annual basis.

The B.C. government already has “robust” measures to ensure that grizzly populations remain strong, said Ellis. It only allows hunting in areas where the population of grizzlies can handle it. “(The B.C. hunt) is one of the most highly controlled hunts on the planet,” he said.

In a Monday, Aug. 14 interview with CBC News, Forests, Lands, Natural Resource Operations and Rural Development (MFLNRO) Minister Doug Donaldson said that “it’s not a matter of numbers. Society has come to the point in B.C. where they are no longer in favour of the grizzly bear trophy hunt.”

The trophy hunt ban will come into force on Nov. 30. The government is also banning grizzly hunting in the Great Bear Rainforest altogether.

In that Aug. 14 interview, Donaldson also said “Hunters will no longer be able to possess the hide or the head or the paws of the grizzly bear… there’s not going to be any loopholes.”

The statement has led to confusion for hunters. Ellis fears that now hunters will be required to leave those parts at the scene of the kill. Under the current system, hunters must show their kills to conservation officers, who in turn ascertain important information, he explained.

“We’re not going to know whether we’re shooting males or females,” he said. The policy, he added, could also put hunters in danger, as they will have to skin the animal then and there, even if they are pressed for time. In response to follow-up questions sent to the MFLNRO, Donaldson said the government wanted to announce the ban to make it clear that this fall’s trophy hunt would be the last.

“The specifics of what will happen to the bear parts will be determined through the consultation process to be launched this fall,” Donaldson said in an emailed statement.

“We think it is important for all those who are interested in our wildlife resources to have a say in wildlife management, so we will be engaging in a collaborative process, to hear from First Nations and stakeholders about the implementation.”

Ellis feels that the new rules are politically motivated and are designed to discourage the hunting of grizzlies altogether. He feels they reflect a major divide between rural and urban B.C.

“I get that Vancouver don’t like seeing a bear shot,” he said. “(But) you can’t pick a particular species and say we’re going to put it on a pedestal. I think that’s poor wildlife management.”

Housing developer and philanthropist Michael Audain — who serves as chairman of the newly formed Grizzly Bear Foundation — said that he doesn’t think the ban goes far enough.

“We don’t feel that any grizzly hunting is wise or necessary. It’s not wise because the species faces enormous threats. If we don’t adopt policies more conducive to the bears, in another generation, there may be very few left in our province,” he said.

Grizzly bears used to roam all over the continent, he said. “(But) they’ve been persecuted like vermin and eradicated from much of North America.”

Closer to home, Johnny Mikes — field director of the Coast to Cascades Grizzly Bear Initiative — said that the trophy-hunting ban makes no difference to grizzly populations in this part of British Columbia.

Hunters are already prohibited from hunting grizzlies in southwest British Columbia, he explained. That’s because levels of grizzlies in the area are precariously low, he added.

“We don’t talk about the hunt,” said Mikes, when asked about whether he is in favour of an outright ban on hunting grizzlies. “We need to talk about how we help endangered species to come back, because in southwest B.C., that’s the issue.”

Mikes said Coast to Cascades is pushing for a “management plan for each threatened population in the coast to cascades region that ensures populations will recover.”

The organization is also calling on government to inhibit the development of valley bottoms to ensure that grizzly habitat is not fragmented.

“It’s important that people don’t feel complacent. There are populations in southern B.C. that could disappear, even though the hunt has been curtailed,” he said.

$13K fine for killing grizzly deemed ‘scandalous’ by conservationists

ttp://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmonton/alberta-man-fined-grizzly-bear-1.4301983

‘The grizzly bear in Alberta is a threatened species,’ says group that had hoped for higher fine

The Canadian Press Posted: Sep 22, 2017 7:54 AM MT Last Updated: Sep 22, 2017 10:20 AM MT

A collared grizzly bear that was being tracked for research by officials in Jasper National Park was killed by a hunter.

A collared grizzly bear that was being tracked for research by officials in Jasper National Park was killed by a hunter. (Government of Yukon)

 An Alberta man charged with killing a collared grizzly bear that was being tracked for research will pay nearly $13,000 in fines, but some say that’s not enough to protect the threatened species.

Ronald Raymond Motkoski pleaded guilty earlier this month in an Edson, Alta., courtroom to possession of wildlife and was fined $2,500. He’s also required to pay $5,000 to Alberta’s BearSmart program and $5,202.76 for the cost of the tracking collar.

Neither he nor his lawyer could be reached for comment this week.

Motkoski was charged in June 2016 after Fish and Wildlife officers were notified by fRI Research that a collar put on grizzly bear No. 141 in Jasper National Park had stopped working near Edson, about 200 kilometres west of Edmonton.

It was determined the three-year-old male grizzly had been shot and killed.

Motkoski told researchers he shot the bear

The Crown prosecutor withdrew a charge of hunting wildlife in a closed season and providing a false or misleading statement. A spokesperson for the province said the charges were withdrawn because some of the evidence did not suggest a reasonable likelihood of conviction.

Another man, John Peter Grant of Fort McMurray, Alta., pleaded guilty on Feb. 2 to unlawful possession of wildlife related to the death of the same bear and was fined a total of $6,000.

Critics say the fines are too low.

“It’s absolutely scandalous,” said Jill Seaton, chair of the Jasper Environmental Association. “The grizzly bear in Alberta is a threatened species.”

Gordon Stenhouse, a scientist with the fRI Research grizzly bear program, said he also had higher expectations.

“I thought there would be a different outcome,” he said, noting the maximum fine is $100,000.

A threatened species

Grizzly bears were listed as threatened in Alberta in 2010 when it was determined there were only about 700 left. A recovery strategy was introduced aimed at reducing conflicts between bears and people.

Poaching remains a problem in Alberta, with statistics showing at least 39 grizzly bears have been killed illegally since a legal hunt ended in 2005.

Bear No. 141 was considered important because he was fitted with a GPS collar in Jasper and left the park within a few weeks.

“It’s quite rare that a bear in Jasper takes off,” said Stenhouse.

Officials with Jasper National Park declined to comment.

Stenhouse said that valuable research was lost with the death of the bear.

No. 141 “was one of a very few bears that we have seen make long-distance movements from Jasper National Park over the past 18 years of research in this area,” he said in an impact statement prepared for court.

“The movements and habitat use of this bear were of significant interest to us in learning more about home range establishment and response to human activities.”

‘An unfortunate loss’

Despite getting about $5,000 to replace the bear’s tracking collar, he said it’s also a financial hit for the program.

“This is an unfortunate loss and does not address any of our time, effort or cost that our research team invested in the successful capture of this bear,” he said.

Losing even one bear hurts the province’s recovery plan, he said.

“From a broader perspective, the key issue is on the common and ongoing problem of the illegal killing of bears,” said Stenhouse. “Some members of the public appear to remain unwilling to share a common landscape and co-exist with this species.”

Should those attitudes continue, he said it’s unlikely that future generations will see grizzly bears anywhere other than the most remote areas of the national parks.

B.C. to end grizzly bear trophy hunting after this season

By Lisa Johnson, Bethany Lindsay, CBC News Posted: Aug 14, 2017 3:00 PM PT Last Updated: Aug 15, 2017 7:12 AM PT

About 250 grizzly bears are killed in B.C. each year by hunters, according to the provincial government. Hunting the bears for meat will still be allowed outside the Great Bear Rainforest.

About 250 grizzly bears are killed in B.C. each year by hunters, according to the provincial government. Hunting the bears for meat will still be allowed outside the Great Bear Rainforest. (Mathieu Belanger/Reuters)

Related Stories

B.C’s new NDP government is ending the province’s controversial grizzly bear trophy hunt, saying British Columbians can no longer stomach the killing of grizzlies as trophies.

The ban will take effect Nov. 30, 2017, throughout the province — after this year’s season, which opens Tuesday in the Peace River region, and later elsewhere.

“It is time,” said Natural Resources Minister Doug Donaldson on Monday.

About 250 grizzlies are killed annually by hunters in B.C., a number Donaldson said is “sustainable” for the population estimated at 15,000 bears, but he said public opinion on the practice has turned.

“It’s not a matter of numbers, it’s a matter of society has come to the point in B.C. where they are no longer in favour of the grizzly bear trophy hunt.”

Grizzly bear buffaloberry bush

A grizzly bear eats buffaloberries. (Alex Taylor/Parks Canada)

The ban will also end all grizzly bear hunting in the coastal region known as the Great Bear Rainforest.

He said the ban isn’t taking effect before this season because there wasn’t time to give notice after the protracted B.C. election, which took place May 9 but didn’t produce a new government until mid-July.

Hunt for meat to be allowed

It’s not clear how many bears would be spared from hunting as a result of the ban.

Hunting bears for meat will be allowed, outside of the Great Bear Rainforest, and neither Donaldson nor ministry staff could say how many of the 250 grizzlies killed on average per year are killed for trophies.

When asked how hunting would be policed, Donaldson said the exact regulations would be determined following consultations with guide-outfitters and others between now and Nov. 30.

“There’s not going to be any loopholes,” he said.

“Hunters will no longer be able to possess the hide or the head or the paws of the grizzly bear.”

It’s not yet clear what hunters will be expected to do with those bear parts, but they would not be leaving the province, he said.

Bear 164

The grizzly bear trophy hunt has been controversial for years in British Columbia. (Dave Gilson/CBC)

The announcement shouldn’t be a surprise for those in the industry, said Donaldson.

“They knew this commitment was in our platform and they knew we were going to act on this commitment.”

Activists worry about ‘loophole’

The grizzly trophy hunt has long been the target of activists and conservationists, who applauded the NDP decision to end to all grizzly hunting in the Great Bear Rainforest.

But those same voices questioned the logic of allowing hunters to kill grizzlies for meat in the rest of the province.

Those critics include housing developer and art philanthropist Michael Audain, chairman of the Grizzly Bear Foundation. In March, the foundation released an 88-page report that included a recommendation to end the trophy hunt.

“My first reaction is one of delight,” Audain said Monday after the news was announced.

“At the same time, I must confess that we do have some concerns about whether the issue of packing the meat out … could become a bit of a loophole.”

Those concerns were echoed by Chris Genovali, executive director of the Raincoast Conservation Foundation.

“Virtually no one legitimately hunts grizzlies for food; killing these bears is strictly a trophy hunt,” Genovali said in a written statement.

Hunting guides disappointed

Meanwhile, B.C. Green Party Leader Andrew Weaver suggested the NDP’s measures don’t fully address the concerns of environmentalists or local hunters, who want to harvest all parts of the bears.

“I’m not sure how this will appease the concerns of anyone. It appears to me that the NDP were trying to play to environmental voters in the election campaign without thinking through their policies,” Weaver said in a written statement.

Mark Werner of the Guide Outfitters Association of B.C. said he was disappointed that his group wasn’t consulted extensively during development of the new regulations. He argued that the true threat to grizzly populations isn’t hunting.

“If you want to do something great for grizzly bears, let’s work on habitat. Shutting down small businesses in this province isn’t going to help grizzly bears,” Werner said.

With files from Rafferty Baker and Ash Kelly

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/plan-to-end-grizzly-trophy-hunting-in-bc-announced-1.4247060

The B.C. government has announced plans to end the controversial grizzly bear trophy hunt, following up on a campaign promise made before the election.

Life-and-death vote for wildlife

HSUS logo
Protect Alaska's wildlifeProtect Alaska’s wildlife

Today, Congress will vote on an appalling amendment from Alaska U.S. Rep. Don Young that seeks to open millions of acres of National Park Service (NPS) lands to the ruthless killing of grizzly bears and wolves. These practices should not occur anywhere, least of all on lands managed by the NPS.

Congress nixed a rule that forbid these terrible practices on National Wildlife Refuges earlier in the year. Now they’re aiming at our National Park Service lands. The Young amendment #43 would subject Alaskan wildlife on NPS lands to hunting methods that most Americans find appalling—such as killing wolves and their pups while in their dens, baiting bears with rotting food in order to shoot them point-blank, and luring hibernating black bears out of their dens with artificial light in order to shoot them.

Your voice is needed to help defeat the Young amendment #43. Please make a brief, polite phone call to Rep. Jaime Herrera Beutler at (202) 225-3536 now.You can simply say, “Please protect wildlife in the FY18 spending package (H.R. 3354) and vote ‘no’ on the Young amendment #43.”

After you call, please send a follow-up message.

Take action
Thank you for all you do for animals.
Wayne's signature
Wayne Pacelle, President & CEO

Drone illegally buzzes grizzly bears in Grand Teton Park

OUTLAWS —  The battle against aerial harassment of wildlife continues as Grand Teton National Park rangers investigate the illegal use of a drone that buzzed a grizzly bear and her two cubs in the northwest Wyoming park on Wednesday.

Park spokeswoman Denise Germann tells the Jackson Hole News & Guide that rangers and others saw the drone hover close to the grizzlies.

But whoever was piloting the drone managed to retrieve it and flee without being seen.

Drone use is illegal for photography or any other public use on National Park Service property, including Grand Teton and Yellowstone.

State laws also prohibit their use in for aiding hunters.

Illegal drone use was also reported in Grand Teton during the total solar eclipse Monday, but Germann was unaware of anyone being cited.

She says there were instances of drone pilots preparing their drones for flight but being confronted by rangers before they launched.

A few related stories as wildlife managers march through this new technological invasion:

 

Rich Landers

http://www.spokesman.com/blogs/outdoors/2017/aug/26/drone-illegally-buzzes-grizzly-bears-grand-teton-park/

The HSUS goes to federal court on behalf of Yellowstone’s grizzly bears

Sixty days ago, The HSUS told Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke that we’d see him in courtif his agency did not reconsider a wrong-headed decision to strip federal protections from grizzly bears in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem. We made good on that promise today.

Joined by our affiliate The Fund for Animals, The HSUS filed a complaint in the federal court for the District of Montana in Missoula. The complaint alleges multiple violations of the Endangered Species Act and the Administrative Procedure Act – the latter a statute that provides a critical backstop to ensure that federal agency decisions are well-reasoned and that they properly evaluate scientific data.

Litigating this case in Missoula has special significance because it lies within the corridor connecting the two largest remaining grizzly bear populations in the lower 48 states: the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem (GYE) and the Northern Continental Divide Ecosystem (NCDE). Before they were nearly wiped out in the early 20th century, grizzly bears numbered in the tens of thousands and roamed across much of the North American continent. ESA protections beginning in 1975 rescued grizzlies from the precipice of extinction. But the fact is that much work remains. The GYE population still numbers fewer than 700 grizzlies, fragmented populations are disconnected, and staple foods like whitebark pine nuts and cutthroat trout remain in sharp decline. Each of the last two years saw record numbers of bears poached, run over on highways, and killed by state agents in so-called “management actions” as the bears have been forced to range further and further outside Yellowstone and Grand Teton national parks in search of food.

There is clear scientific evidence to necessitate maintaining protections and continued federal monitoring for the grizzly bear population. But instead, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has ignored expert data and conducted a tortured statutory analysis to turn over management of bears to states eager to align with the narrow interests of trophy hunters, ranchers, and other consumptive users of our nation’s shared natural resources. Wyoming, Idaho, and Montana have already begun the process of planning trophy-hunting seasons on bears, just as they have done after federal protections for the gray wolf were removed. Now, with federal protections eliminated for the Great Bear and hunting seasons looming, serious-minded scientists honestly wonder whether Yellowstone’s bears will ever again connect with populations in northern Montana and Idaho and establish a viable population of grizzly bears in the United States.

While the decision to strip protections for Yellowstone grizzly bears is rickety as a matter of law and science, it’s also wrong on economics and the values of America’s great majority of citizens. As I’ve argued in this context and others, grizzlies are more valuable alive than dead. They are responsible for bringing in tens of millions of dollars into local economies in and around the Yellowstone and Grand Teton national parks. The GYE states, acting through unelected and unaccountable game commissions, are shooting themselves in the foot by ignoring the guides, photographers, hoteliers, and small business people whose livelihoods depend on live grizzlies. Recently, the newly elected government in British Columbia, relying largely on a concern for animal welfare and for the economic health of rural communities, pledged to bar the trophy hunting of grizzly bears in the province by the end of November.

Delisting and trophy hunting this iconic species is more than just an attack on principles of conservation, science-based decision-making, indigenous rights, government accountability, and animal welfare. It’s an assault on one of America’s most iconic species, situated in America’s most storied ecological region. The HSUS is proud to stand with an enormous range of stakeholders to defend the grizzly bear.

https://blog.humanesociety.org/wayne/2017/08/hsus-goes-federal-court-behalf-yellowstones-grizzly-bears.html?credit=blog_post_082417_idhome-page

Court Helps Cabinet Yaak Grizzlies, Again: Time for Fish and Wildlife Service to Do Better

https://www.grizzlytimes.org/single-post/2017/08/29/Court-Helps-Cabinet-Yaak-Grizzlies-Again-Time-for-Fish-and-Wildlife-Service-to-Do-Better

August 29, 2017

|

Louisa Willcox

Grizzlies in the remote Cabinet Yaak ecosystem in northwest Montana are literally on death’s doorstep, numbering less than 50 grizzlies – less than half of the FWS’ absurdly small recovery goal of 100 bears.  Making matters worse, since this population was listed as threatened in 1975 (along with other grizzlies in the lower-48 states), grizzlies have been functionally split between the northern Yaak region and the southern Cabinet Mountains; there has been no movement of grizzly bears between these isolated segments for many years. The reason? Excessive killing, particularly poaching, and the press of human activity.

The listed status of the population matters. If Cabinet Yaak grizzlies are given the more stringent “endangered” protections, the FWS will have to designate critical habitat for them. One major reason that the population is doing so poorly is habitat degradation. Excessive road networks on the Kootenai Forest, built to cut down the huge trees in this lush landscape, allow easy entry for poachers, who constitute the leading cause of death in this population. By contrast, poaching is not nearly as severe a problem in the two wilderness-based strongholds for grizzlies around Greater Yellowstone and the Northern Continental Divide Ecosystem (NCDE), centered on Glacier Park.

 Christiansen’s Ruling: The Context

In 2014, FWS had downgraded the Cabinet Yaak population from a “warranted, but precluded” endangered status, meaning that the population deserved greater protections, but that FWS could not deal with the problem due to other priorities that it deemed more important. These greater protections had been granted by a judge in 1993 as a result of litigation by conservationists.

To justify its defiance of the judge’s earlier ruling, the FWS relied on a 2010 determination that it used to dodge listing the polar bear as endangered, despite the fact that global warming has been ferociously melting sea ice needed by polar bears to hunt seals. In this case a judge allowed the FWS to interpret “in danger of extinction” as meaning “on the brink of extinction,” with the proviso that this interpretation applied only to the special circumstances of polar bears.

Meanwhile, between 1993 and 2014 threats to Cabinet-Yaak grizzlies from roadbuilding, human settlement, and poaching mounted. The situation is so dire for these bears that the FWS regularly augments the population by bringing in grizzlies from the NCDE population. More on this later.

Nevertheless, the FWS wanted to downgrade the population’s status so that it would not have to make hard decisions that would challenge powerful status quo interests in the logging and mining industries. At the same time, the agency greenlighted a Forest Service plan that instituted weaker standards for managing roads in the Cabinet-Yaak compared to  those applied to grizzly habitat in Greater Yellowstone and the NCDE, both of which support 10-15 times more grizzlies. Stringent management of roads in these better-protected ecosystems is seen as key to the progress made toward population recovery.

Christensen determined that the FWS’ downgrading of protections for the Cabinet-Yaak’s grizzlies was “arbitrary and capricious.” He said: “There is no evidence… to suggest that the agency found that the change in policy was permissible under the Endangered Species Act, believed that the new policy was better than the agencies’ prior interpretations, or otherwise provided a good reason for the change.” (link)

Michael Garrity, Director of the Alliance for the Wild Rockies, which brought the case to court, wryly observed that, instead of redoubling efforts to protect and restore habitat and reduce mortalities, the FWS has spent the better part of the last two decades dragging its feet.

Second Positive Court Ruling for Cabinet Yaak Grizzlies in a Year

Judge Christiansen’s ruling is the second in a year in aid of the Cabinet-Yaak’s beleaguered grizzlies. In May, 2016, Magistrate Judge Jeremiah Lynch rocked the grizzly bear world by sentencing a man to six months in federal prison for poaching a threatened grizzly bear in the Cabinet Yaak ecosystem (link).

Although the additional fine of $5,000 was stiff but not unusual for violations of the ESA, jail time is unheard of as a penalty for any imperiled species, let alone grizzly bears. There has never been a louder message to would-be poachers that federal officials are taking their duty to protect endangered species seriously.

The facts of this case showed that the killing was not in self-defense, but rather as a malicious lark. Shaloko Katzer of Mead, Washington followed a grizzly, then shot and killed it in the Yaak Falls campground in July, 2015.

Judge Lynch was unusually clear about his intentions when he addressed Katzer during sentencing, saying: “You went out of your way to kill this bear. But the most important thing is this is going to stop. And, unfortunately, you may be the first example, but the unnecessary killing of these threatened species is going to stop. And you, sentencing you to this is necessary to deter all those individuals who might undertake or engage in the same conduct of I guess what they might consider a sport.” (link)

Lynch and Christensen are not the only judges to have ruled in favor of grizzly bears. In fact, during the last 25 years, Courts have determined on at least 20 occasions that more needs to be done to advance recovery of threatened grizzly bears, which for the last 50 years have remained at a mere 2-3% of their former numbers.

Yet, so often, the FWS would rather do nothing and lose again in court than work to get recovery right, especially in the case of Cabinet Yaak grizzlies. The agency seems to care more about minimizing political risks to its funding and prerogatives, which admittedly are considerable, rather than fulfilling its public trust responsibilities by aggressively recovering a charismatic endangered species for the benefit of all Americans.

And, time may not be on the side of the few surviving bears in the Cabinet Yaak.

Time is Running Out for Cabinet-Yaak, Selkirk Grizzlies

For decades, the FWS’ top priority has been stripping Yellowstone’s grizzlies of their endangered species protections, which happened for the second time in June of this year. Removing protections for grizzlies in the Northern Continental Divide ecosystem is the agency’s next goal; a delisting proposal is expected for the NCDE in 2018.

The FWS’ focus on eviscerating protections for these larger populations has come at the additional expense of grizzlies that are on the ropes — not only in the Cabinet Yaak, but its neighbor to the west in Idaho, the Selkirks.  The Selkirks, a similarly small ecosystem that also straddles the Canadian border, and supports perhaps 50 animals on the US side.

Given the small size of these populations, the slide to extinction could be relatively quick, as these bears are not far from zero now. Grizzlies have extremely low reproduction rates, which makes recovery much more difficult. There are only a handful of reproductive females in each ecosystem, and the loss of even one of these females could be devastating.

It is impossible to overstate the level of threat facing Selkirk and Cabinet-Yaak grizzlies.  Sadly, there is no designated Wilderness in the Yaak area, and, the Cabinet Mountains are long and skinny, giving people easy access to even the farthest reaches of these scant wildlands. Only a small portion of the Selkirks is protected Wilderness.

There is no portion of either ecosystem protected by a National Park, which is why you may have never heard of them. That matters, because in Yellowstone, Glacier and, seasonally, Grand Teton Parks, grizzly bears are protected from people with guns. This alone has made a huge difference to recovering grizzly bears.

Both the Cabinet-Yaak and Selkirk ecosystems are hammered by logging roads.  The Canada side of the ecosystem is pretty beat up too – making bears more or less isolated from larger populations on all sides.

Adding insult to injury, two hard rock mines are poised to hemi-sect the Cabinet-Yaak ecosystem. If the Rock Creek Mine is built on the west side of the Cabinets and the Montanore mine on the east, the ability of grizzly bear to travel from the north to the southern third of the bear’s range would be seriously compromised. Even the FWS has admitted that these mines, if built at the same time (which is now proposed), would be the last nails in the coffin for this population. So far, litigation brought by conservation groups (does this sound like a theme?) has forestalled these mines.

As I mentioned earlier, prospects even under the current conditions are so bleak that the US Fish and Wildlife Service has resorted to dumping grizzly bears from the healthier Glacier population into the Cabinet-Yaak to prevent the population from winking out. Still, out of 17 grizzly bears that have been relocated during the last 15 years, only three have been known to contribute genes to the population.

All is not lost, however, for the habitat, with its Pacific maritime influence, is incredibly productive, with berries that Yellowstone grizzly bears could only dream of.  There is hope, if the thugs stop killing bears, as the ESA requires, and if enough habitat is protected.

Uplisting the Cabinet Yaak and Selkirk populations to endangered status and designating critical habitat for these bears could prompt needed restoration and make habitat more secure for grizzlies.  Stiffer penalties and more aggressive prosecution of poaching cases could also reduce malicious killing. Better coexistence practice could reduce conflicts. Proven methods include running electric fence around beehives and chicken coops, and installing bear resistant garbage bins around home sites.

Not doing stupid, harmful stuff would also help enormously.

Now for the Dumbest Idea Ever: New, High-Use Hiking Trail Through the Heart of the Yaak

Just as you think things cannot get worse for Cabinet Yaak grizzlies, the Forest Service has proposed a new high use hiking trail through the heart of the wildest part of the Yaak. The Pacific Northwest National Scenic Trail would run 1,200 miles from Glacier National Park to Port Townsend, Washington, tying into the popular Pacific Crest Trail.

As many as 4,000 hikers are expected to blast through the bear-iest habitat in the Yaak – many undoubtedly oblivious to bears as they listen to tunes on headsets, as is the custom on the Pacific Crest Trail. The likelihood of negative consequences is high as hikers displace bears and increase the chance of conflicts with bears.

Local conservationists, including the prolific writer Rick Bass, have suggested an alternative route that avoids this refugium, a measure also supported by preeminent grizzly bear scientist Chuck Jonkel, who passed away last year (link). But, a crazy rider to a 2009 spending bill sponsored by Norm Dix, former Congressman from Washington, authorized the trail.

While the Forest Service can still say “no” to the current route, the agency is reluctant to change course. Meanwhile a trail advocacy group, Pacific Northwest Trail Association (PNTA), has been bullying the government to push the process through. “The trail is coming whether you like it or not,” said Jeff Kish of PTNA to Jessie Grossman of the local conservation group Yaak Valley Forest Council in a recent conversation.

Cabinet-Yaak grizzlies need more, not less habitat. This issue is a no brainer: the Forest Service and FWS should simply re-route the trail so as to minimize impacts on grizzlies. But, then, both agencies love to say “yes” to every development proposal that crosses their desk.

It is true, too, that avoiding stupid stuff like the Yaak trail won’t achieve recovery, which entails doubling the size of the population. For that, we need a bigger picture approach.

Yellowstone and Cabinet Yaak, Selkirks Grizzly Bears Need Each Other

We tend to talk about the Greater Yellowstone, Cabinet-Yaak, Selkirks and Glacier, as if they are separate grizzly bear planets. They aren’t. They simply represent bears in the last bits of land where grizzly bears survived when the FWS got around to listing them in 1975. These ecosystems represented the small remnants of what had been one more or less contiguous grizzly bear population that stretched from the Great Plains to the Pacific coast and south to Mexico.

Despite all the work since 1975 to recover grizzlies, they still constitute only 3% of their former numbers. While scientists say that continued isolation is a serious problem for all these populations, FWS still treats them as separate postage stamps.

Geneticists tell us that Yellowstone bears will be forever at risk genetically if they stay isolated in their current ecological island. Cabinet-Yaak and Selkirk grizzly bears cannot stay isolated either if their future is to be ensured. All must be connected to each other and to larger populations in Canada. The government knows this, but it is too darn difficult to talk about such a big vision in such a mean-spirited, anti-science, political climate.

Many experts say that for Yellowstone’s grizzly bears to connect with bears elsewhere, the best route is through the Selway Bitterroot ecosystem north through, yes you guessed it, the Cabinet-Yaak ecosystem.  This means that grizzly bears must be recovered in Idaho’s vast Selway Bitterroot ecosystem, which scientists say could support 600 or so grizzlies.

But the lynchpin for recovery is the largest grizzly bear population, centered on Glacier Park, with perhaps 900 or so bears.  Although only four grizzly bears are known to have moved on their own from this ecosystem to the Cabinet-Yaak and stay there, more could do so in the future if habitat is protected and bears are not killed. Grizzlies are also moving south towards Yellowstone, and into the north end of the Selway Bitterroot recovery area. Meanwhile, they are moving east, recolonizing prairie habitat.

Grizzly bears are showing the way to recovery with their paws. From Yellowstone, bears are moving further west along the Centennial Range towards the Selway Bitteroot. Individuals have moved south from the Cabinets as well. Grizzlies, probably from the NCDE, have shown up this summer in the Big Belt Mountains, about 100 miles north of the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem. They are connecting on their own, if we don’t kill them.

Instead of treating the five remaining grizzly bear populations as isolated islands, the FWS should look at opportunities to achieve durable recovery through expanding secure habitat by restoration and improved co-existence practices. The 1992 recovery plan, which ignored the pressing issue of climate change and gave short shrift to connectivity, is in sore need of revision. This is the place to reimagine recovery and the possibilities of creating a large contiguous population of grizzlies in our northern Rockies.

Instead of dragging their feet until they are sued again and spanked by judges, the FWS and Forest Service should show a little courage and exercise leadership – for the bears and all the rest of us.

Please do what you can to help Cabinet Yaak grizzlies: tell the Forest Service to re-route the Pacific Northwest Trail to avoid the heart of the Yaak. Send an email to mtmcgrath@fs.fed.us, and send a copy to info@yaakvalley.org. The Yaak Valley Forest Council (www.yaakvalley.org) is leading the fight against this idiotic trail. You can help stop the disastrous Rock Creek mine by supporting Rock Creek Alliance (www.rockcreekalliance.org). And the Alliance for the Wild Rockies (www.allianceforthewildrockies.org)  brought the latest uplisting case — stay tuned for more chapters on this drama.

Interior Department, key House Republicans maneuver to open National Park Service lands to killing grizzly bears, wolves

https://blog.humanesociety.org/wayne/2017/08/interior-department-key-house-republicans-maneuver-open-national-park-service-lands-aerial-gunning-grizzly-bears.html

In April, President Trump signed a resolution, enabled by the Congressional Review Act and passed by Congress on a near party-line vote, that repealed a U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) rule restricting particularly cruel and unsporting methods of killing grizzly bears, wolves, and other predators on national wildlife refuges in Alaska. There are now multiple indications that the Trump administration and some allies in Congress are gearing up to unwind a nearly identical rule, approved nearly two years ago, that restricts these appalling predator-killing practices on 20 million acres of National Park Service (NPS) lands in Alaska. Our humane community nationwide must ready itself to stop this second assault on a class of federal lands (national preserves) set aside specifically to benefit wildlife.

Today, the Sacramento Bee’s Stuart Leavenworth broke the story that Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER) had obtained a leaked memo that appears to show that senior political appointees at the Department of the Interior have barred top officials at NPS from speaking out against a widely circulated draft bill in Congress – the SHARE Act – that includes a provision to repeal the parks rule. The bill, which will be assigned to the House Committee on Natural Resources, contains a host of anti-wildlife provisions. Top officials at NPS reviewed the bill and objected to many provisions, and memorialized those objections in an internal memo. A senior Interior Department official sent back the memo to the NPS officials with cross-out markings on nearly all of the objections raised by the NPS. That helps explain why lawmakers on Capitol Hill have not heard a negative word from the NPS about this legislative package and its provisions that amount to an assault on the wildlife inhabiting Alaska’s national preserves.

Several weeks prior, Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke had signaled his desire to reopen the NPS predator control rule, with an eye toward changing and even gutting it. The rule passed with almost no dissent when NPS adopted it in October 2015.

In short, there is a double-barreled attack on the rule, and the administration seems to be locked and loaded on both strategies – one legislative and the other executive.

In March, the House voted 225 to 193 in favor of H.J. Resolution 69, authored by Alaska’s Rep. Don Young, to repeal the USFWS rule on predator killing. Those 225 members voted to overturn a federal rule – years in the works, and crafted by professional wildlife managers at the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service – to stop some of the most appalling practices ever imagined in the contemporary era of wildlife management. Denning of wolf pups, killing hibernating bears, baiting grizzly bears, and trapping grizzly and black bears with steel-jawed leghold traps and snares. It’s the stuff of wildlife snuff films.

Just weeks later, the Senate followed suit, passing S.J.R. 18 by a vote of 52 to 47. I was so proud of New Mexico Senator Martin Heinrich, himself an ardent sportsman, and Sens. Dick Blumenthal, D-Conn., Cory Booker, D-N.J., Maria Cantwell, D-Wash., and Tom Udall, D-N.M., for deconstructing the phony arguments advanced by the backers of the measure. If they had been arguing the case in front of a jury, they would have carried every fair-minded juror considering the evidence and honoring a standard of decency. They eviscerated the phony states’ rights arguments advanced by their colleagues. Their false subsistence hunting arguments. Their inaccurate representations of the views of Alaskans.

President Trump then signed H.R. Res. 69/S.J.R. 18 and repealed the USFWS rule.

The USFWS rule was at particular risk because it had been adopted in 2016, and the Congressional Review Act allows Congress and the president to nullify recently adopted rules with simple majority votes in both chambers and no committee review of the measures. The nearly identical NPS rule came out a year earlier and the CRA doesn’t apply to such long-standing rules. In short, the Department of the Interior could weaken the rule by opening a new rulemaking process, or Congress could repeal it (albeit without the expedited review and also perhaps without a simple majority vote in the Senate).

Today’s reporting by the Sacramento Bee, and the work of PEER, have sent up a flare, warning the world that there is maneuvering to launch an unacceptable assault on wildlife on National Park Service lands. Hunting grizzly bears over bait, killing wolves in their dens, and other similarly unsporting practices have no place anywhere on North American lands, and least of all on refuges and preserves. We’ll need you to raise your voice and write to your lawmakers, urging them to block any serious consideration of the SHARE Act in its current form. And tell Secretary Zinke that’s there’s no honor and no sportsmanship in allowing these practices on national preserves.