Taking a deeper dive into the Yellowstone Grizzly dispute.
A federal judge in Montana recently ruled to reimpose Endangered Species Act (ESA) protections on grizzly bears (Ursus arctos horribilis) in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem (GYE).
This motion comes after Judge Dana L. Christensen, Chief United States District Judge of the United States District Court for the District of Montana, blocked the upcoming managed hunt on two recent occasions. This goes against the findings and conclusions by regional wildlife biologists and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS).
In the 48-page document explaining why he is restoring ESA protections on this particular strain of grizzly bear, Judge Christiansen accused the agency of intentionally misleading the public by suggesting it downplayed threats to grizzlies in the region and the five surrounding recovery areas.
“Although this Order may have impacts throughout grizzly country and beyond, this case is not about the ethics of hunting, and it is not about solving human- or livestock-grizzly conflicts as a practical or philosophical matter,” wrote Judge Christensen. “These issues are not before the Court. This Court’s review, constrained by the Constitution and the laws enacted by Congress, is limited to answering a yes-or-no question: Did the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (hereinafter “Service”) exceed its legal authority when it delisted the Greater Yellowstone grizzly bear?”
“By delisting the Greater Yellowstone grizzly without analyzing how delisting would affect the remaining members of the lower-48 grizzly designation, the Service failed to consider how reduced protections in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem would impact the other grizzly populations. Thus, the Service “entirely failed to consider an important aspect of the problem,” he added.
Judge Christensen also wrote FWS “illegally negotiated away its obligation to apply the best available science in order to reach an accommodation with the states of Wyoming, Idaho and Montana.”
In response to the judge’s move, lawmakers, hunters, and conservation groups are prepared to fight back against this unsound ruling that legitimizes emotion over science.
Congresswoman Liz Cheney (R-WY) introduced the Grizzly Bear State Management Act. If passed, this bill would permit the Department of the Interior to reaffirm its delisting decision and bar further judicial review of it.
“The decision by a Federal District Court Judge in Montana to re-list the grizzly ignores science, and disregards the important work done by the state of Wyoming to establish an effective grizzly bear management plan,” she said. “My bill will stop this abuse of the court system and put management of the grizzly back in the hands of experts in Wyoming.”
Joe Kondelis, president of the Wyoming-based Western Bear Foundation, said this move by Judge Dana L. Christensen will have serious implications for wildlife management efforts.
“We are very frustrated at the recent ruling by Judge Christiansen on the status of the GYE Grizzly Delisting,” said Kondelis. “We have reached a point in wildlife management that is very discouraging to us, a point where sound science and 40+ years-worth of work were thrown out the window by one individual ruling from an appointed seat.”
Kondelis said Judge Christensen, who was an Obama administration-appointed judge, is “making decisions on science and wildlife conservation of which he is no expert.”
“His [Judge Christensen’s] ruling was based on trivial loopholes brought forth by the plaintiffs,” he added. “On the heels of a mauling resulting in a death of a Wyoming hunting guide Mark Uptain and another very bad mauling in Wyoming, we found his decision irresponsible and biased.”
Kondelis said the grizzly bear is viewed very poorly in the eyes of many residents of Montana, Idaho, and Wyoming, adding it’s “no fault of their own, but the fault of the red tape and government process.”
“We need to create advocates for the species within the hunting community and that would ensure a recovered species for generations after us to enjoy. Just look at the North American Model for Conservation and how its ideals have helped put more game on the landscape than ever before.”
Jana Waller, host of Skull Bound TV on Sportsman Channel, often encounters grizzly bears in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem region while scouting for elk and mule deer, having most recently spent 10 days near the Rocky Mountain Front in Montana.
“We saw 11 grizzlies in less than a five square mile area, all of which were filmed,” Waller said. “When you personally witness the sheer numbers of grizzlies and their impact on the herd numbers and even the herd’s natural behaviors it’s frustrating to see politics and emotions being used instead of science to dictate management. I spoke with multiple ranchers in that area who are having more and more encounters with the bears not only killing their livestock but invading their property.”
Waller stressed the need for observers to see how wildlife management efforts play out instead of wholly putting the blame on hunters, who lead the charge on conservation efforts.
“I think the masses would be shocked to learn that hunters are the ones primarily paying for our country’s wildlife management through the purchases of licenses, tags, stamps, conservation organizations and excise tax on hunting related products,” she said.
Waller added, “The money is allocated to the state fish and wildlife agencies [through Pittman-Robertson funds], which has resulted in the recovered numbers of deer, turkeys and many other game and nongame species that benefit both hunters and non-hunters. In other words, there are more animals and birds today because of hunters—a tough pill to swallow for those against hunting.”
“Once people understand that wildlife needs to be managed they need to look at the cause and effect of the predator-prey relationship. To put it simply, when there are too many bears, mountain lions, wolves or even coyotes in an area then the calf and fawn survival rates decrease, significantly impacting the health of the herds. I’ve often posed the question to non-hunters, “Would you put a bunch of piranhas in your children’s fish tank?””
Waller also bemoaned mainstream media outlets, like Wall Street Journal, mischaracterizing the planned managed hunt in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem, suggesting it was slated to take place in Yellowstone National Park.
“The mainstream media should be ashamed of themselves by consistently loading their headlines with false information and heartstring tactics, claiming the grizzly hunt was to take place INSIDE Yellowstone National Park and for the sole purpose of trophy hunting, both incorrect and misleading,” she said.
“Federal judges, media and politicians need to speak with those who are actually in the great outdoors experiencing grizzlies and their impacts first hand like outfitters, hunters, and ranchers instead of making emotional decisions from their city sky rises.”
As hunters very well know, hunting is forbidden in the majority of National Parks—specifically in Yellowstone National Park. The publication later corrected its tweet.
Had the grizzly hunt taken place as scheduled, 23 grizzly bears of the estimated 700 residing in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem would only be available for the hunt. If two grizzly sows were to have been harvested before the end of season, the rest of the hunt would have been cancelled. Experts suggest it’s impossible for all grizzlies to be successfully harvested, so claims suggesting the species would be decimated are intentionally misleading.
Judicial review that seeks to undermine tried and tested wildlife management laws are not only detrimental to science, it’s also detrimental to wildlife like the grizzly bear.
Congress is currently working to modernize the ESA and the protections it affords to wildlife to better reflect wildlife management efforts. Contact your lawmakers and urge them to support wildlife management efforts—including that involving big game predators.