The Effects of Delisting Yellowstone Grizzly Bears
By Lisa Upson and Steve Primm
At the end of this month, a Federal judge in Missoula, Montana will decide whether removal of Yellowstone Grizzly Bears from the Endangered Species List after 42 years of protection is legal and valid. In doing so, the judge will also decide whether state-managed hunting of grizzlies can proceed. While Montana decided to wait a year before approving a hunt, the states of Idaho and Wyoming have set up hunts to begin this fall, allowing for up to 23 grizzlies to be killed between the two states.
We are in this line of work because we admire and respect grizzly bears and other large carnivores, and we do not condone recreational killing of them.
There are many concerns about the removal of federal protections from grizzly bears including and in addition to hunting grizzlies. Our concerns include how sport hunting might affect our goal of achieving connectivity for grizzlies between Yellowstone and the Northern Continental Divide Ecosystem bears (NCDE), helping grizzlies expand their presence into more historic range, and helping them walk into Central Idaho – a large federal recovery area with no confirmed grizzlies. We have questions about state management plans adequately addressing human-bear conflicts towards these goals. Conflict prevention programs let grizzlies roam with fewer risks to bears and people alike.
Some people have asked us whether the hunting of grizzlies will diminish the importance of conflict prevention, specifically how hunting will affect grizzly bears’ ability to disperse out of Yellowstone to the West and Northwest (into what we call the High Divide region, or Southwest Montana). These questions seem to be focused on bear numbers being reduced so much by hunting that we won’t need coexistence in some areas. Or that hunting will replace the need to coexist; that there will be little incentive to find ways to share the landscape with grizzlies.
We think conflict prevention work is equally (or even more) important in the scenario of delisting and hunting for these reasons:
In key connectivity areas, the number of grizzlies at risk of being hunted is relatively low. The bulk of the grizzlies funneling into the High Divide (key connectivity area close to Yellowstone) will come out of Yellowstone Park and into Montana, likely into/through the Centennial and Madison Valleys, the Ruby Valley, and up in to the Big Hole Valley, ultimately into Central Idaho and connecting with NCDE bears along the way.
*A little more detail is warranted here: The majority of the 2018 grizzly bear mortality from hunting, at least in the first year, will take place in Wyoming, South and East of Yellowstone and Grand Teton National Parks. Bears that are hunted in these areas will reduce the density of bears in the eastern/southern parts of the ecosystem, a reduction in density that may not result in a substantial reduction of bears on the western side of the ecosystem. While grizzlies anywhere in the ecosystem are important for a variety of reasons, our work prioritizes helping them connect with other grizzly populations and recolonizing in Central Idaho; thus, traversing the High Divide. Hunting quotas are lower along the western tier of the GYE than in other areas, and may have less of an impact on bears moving into the High Divide. We don’t know for sure, because bears are unpredictable and wide-ranging animals, but we hope and believe this could be the case – at least for now.*
The orange shaded area represents hunting units. The hunting levels vary widely throughout. E.g., the westernmost unit in Idaho allows one GB; the southern and eastern areas in WY allow more. Focusing on connectivity with the NCDE and Central Idaho, we look towards important conflict prevention in the High Divide (represented by yellow swath), where there is suitable habitat, but also conflict risks.
Conflicts are often used as a reason to increase hunting quotas, or to be heavy-handed in the use of lethal control. We’re already hearing this in some communities that are experiencing sporadic conflicts with grizzlies. Conversely, effective conflict prevention programs help communities accept and support having grizzlies around. If support for conflict prevention dries up, expect more calls for bears to be killed.
Coexistence is a cultural change in this region. Funders, NGOs, communities, and agencies have invested tremendous resources in the last 20 years and it’s critical we don’t give up on progress. If we start backing away from conflict work, we send a signal that we weren’t committed to begin with, undercutting the willingness and innovation that has grown through years of hard work.
Perhaps the most compelling reason coexistence will remain critical is this simple one: To the extent there is a risk of dispersing bears in key areas getting killed, we need to make sure the ones that survive keep moving west and northwest.
The state of Montana will eventually institute a grizzly hunt, but the one year deferral is significant. Maintaining and expanding local support for coexistence in Montana communities will be essential in the future.
There are many things in flux as we work through another season of conflict prevention and grizzly reconnection. From potential changes to the Endangered Species Act itself, to the delisting court decision later this month, to the individual choices and actions of people who share space with grizzlies, there are many unknowns.
One thing we do know, however, is that grizzlies will be out there, following their evoluntionarily-honed instincts to find food and mates. We also know that those instincts can easily get them into risky encounters with people, and that it’s up to all of us to do what we can to head off those conflicts.
It’s essential we continue working in rural communities in western Montana to create passageways between wildland habitat cores for grizzlies to roam, reconnect, and recolonize. Probably even more important once Yellowstone grizzlies are deslited, whenever that happens.