Delisting grizzlies

[BuzzH]

The sea lions arent the problem...

Before overfishing began in the late 1800s, the Columbia River basin supported 16 million salmon. Hydropower dams built during the Great Depression blocked the salmon's migration. And growth in agriculture and home building destroyed streams where salmon spawn. As a result, some 50 populations of Pacific salmon and related steelhead went extinct, according to the fisheries service.

I bet if we had even 1/10th the historic runs of 16 million salmon...neither the sea lions nor the sport fishermen would be bitching...and the ESA, delisting, etc. wouldnt even be a concern.

 

[A-con]

Hey I got an idea !
Lets talk about delisting grizzlies, what do ya think ?

Just because a few people are talking about delisting, doesn’t mean it's going to happen anytime soon.

#1 People/government talk about it for a year or two.

#2 Government starts hearings ( starts the process ), it takes a year ( or two )

#3 Bear huggers sue, it's tied up in court ( for a year or four )

#4 Somebody wins, and somebody appeals ( another two or three years )

#5 Delisting finally wins, hunts are set. ( can you say "a year or two " )

#6 The day before the first hunt starts, some but buddy judge issues a stay and agrees to hear another law suite. ( return to step #3 and wait another seven or eight years )
Note: the second law suite is on a completely different issue, like;
Grizzly poop makes old growth trees grow thicker and spotted owls are making a comeback.

OK, now you may criticize my spelling and lack of education.

Anybody want to bet that we will not see a grizzly season in the lower 48 in the next five years ?

 

[ELKCHSR]

LOL A-Con...

That looks more like the real scenario...

Maybe this time it will be different, but I will have to be the real cynical one on this topic and go with yours...

 

[BuzzH]

Hey A-con,

Werent you one of the dudes that didnt think MT would be having a bison season this year because the enviro wacko hippies were going to "shut it down"???

You give the hippies way too much credit...

Oh, and by the way, bison are being killed in MT. So much for the hippies...

 

[Ithaca 37]

Grizzly bears are thriving in Yellowstone National Park and expanding their range into neighboring Idaho, Montana and Wyoming.

State governments have been a partner in the grizzly's renaissance. They have earned the chance — and the responsibility — to manage the great bear. The federal government's plan to remove the Yellowstone grizzly from its endangered species list is well timed and well constructed, and it could even help the grizzly recover elsewhere in Idaho.

The mighty grizzly lives in delicate balance with humans, yet the numbers support "delisting" the grizzly, in and around Yellowstone.

In 1975, when grizzlies were protected under the then-nascent Endangered Species Act, 220 to 320 grizzlies roamed the Yellowstone ecosystem. Today, more than 600 grizzlies live in the Yellowstone region, more than half of the grizzlies in the lower 48. The population is growing at 4 to 7 percent per year — a rate that could allow the population to double yet again in 10 to 20 years.

Yellowstone probably has about as many grizzlies as it can hold; even the Greater Yellowstone Coalition, an influential environmental group opposing delisting, concedes this point. A growing grizzly population is returning to habitat that has been vacant for decades, including parts of Eastern Idaho. "We've got bears pretty much moving in all directions," said Chris Servheen, grizzly bear recovery coordinator for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

As grizzlies fan out, it makes sense to give state wildlife agencies more control over bear management. With local control comes an obligation to remember the bear's special demands.

Unlike wolves, grizzlies breed slowly. A grizzly may breed at 4 1/2 or 5 1/2 years old, but some grizzlies do not breed until they reach 8 1/2 years old. Females breed once every three or more years, giving birth to one to three cubs. Grizzlies generally live only to 15 to 20 years, so every cub counts.

This fierce yet fragile predator is coming back because the federal government and states have spent years working together to limit bear mortality — keeping sheep ranching out of bear country, improving garbage disposal, prosecuting poachers.

The states have ample incentive to remain vigilant, even without the hammer of federal law. Idaho and other states could allow lucrative grizzly hunting seasons — but only if bear mortality numbers remain low enough to sustain the species. That's powerful motivation for careful management. On top of that is strong interstate peer pressure: No state will want to mess up so badly that the federal government has to assume bear management across three states.

The delisting plan is layered with safeguards:

• Female and male grizzlies each need up 300 or 500 square miles respectively, and the plan is sensitive to their intense habitat demands. For instance, oil and gas development could occur in prime bear habitat only if other public land use is discontinued elsewhere.

• Bears will be closely monitored after delisting. Congress added $1.1 million for monitoring this year, bringing the total to $3.4 million in state and federal spending, Servheen said. Just as states will be motivated to manage bears wisely, Western members of Congress will have powerful incentive to ensure the experts continue to get the money they need to track Yellowstone grizzlies.

• The plan calls for maintaining at least 500 grizzlies in and around Yellowstone. If the bear gets into trouble, the federal government, states, citizen groups or individuals may seek federal protection for the grizzly. In a crisis, the federal government could move quickly: "We can emergency relist if we need to, within a couple of weeks," Servheen said.

If the Yellowstone grizzly population holds steady, or continues to increase, under states' control, federal officials will be able to focus their attention elsewhere. All other grizzlies in the lower 48 would remain on the endangered species list. These federally protected bears include two small populations in Idaho: the 40 to 50 grizzlies in the Selkirk Mountains of North Idaho and Washington, and the 30 to 40 grizzlies in the Cabinet-Yaak region of North Idaho and western Montana.

We also hope delisting will allow the federal government to work under the Endangered Species Act on a plan to bring back grizzlies to Central Idaho, where they have been absent for more than half a century.

Recovering these grizzly populations will require the strict protections afforded by the Endangered Species Act.

The grizzly bear needs to remain on top of the food chain in the Yellowstone region. The bear also deserves a place in other areas of wild Idaho. The delisting plan will preserve Yellowstone's bears — and could spark a renaissance for Idaho's bears.

http://www.idahostatesman.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20051127/NEWS05/511270321/1052

 

[Ithaca 37]

Two weeks ago, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service issued a proposal to take grizzly bears in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem off the Endangered Species Act's threatened species list. Delisting Yellowstone's grizzlies is a tremendous success story that many agencies and individuals have helped bring about, but much of the credit belongs to the leadership provided by the states of Idaho, Montana and Wyoming.

When grizzly bears were listed under the ESA in 1975, there were less than 250 bears in Greater Yellowstone. Today, thanks to the protections provided by the ESA, and a cooperative effort between state and federal agencies, there are more than 600 grizzlies, and bears are being seen in places where they haven't been present for decades.

For several years, biologists have been working on a conservation strategy to manage grizzlies and grizzly habitat after they are delisted, and state, rather than federal, agencies have management responsibility. The first draft of the federal strategy was issued five years ago. At that time, the governors of Idaho, Montana and Wyoming convened a three-state citizen roundtable to review this work. After the citizens made their recommendations, the governors, including Idaho's Dirk Kempthorne, endorsed the conservation strategy as far as it went, but also directed the three state fish and wildlife agencies to develop grizzly management plans to complement the work of the federal agencies.

The result of this leadership is more than the sum of its parts. Not only have three state management plans been developed and adopted, but a model of federal-state cooperation has emerged that will help other species listed under the Endangered Species Act. Federal land management agencies, including the Forest Service and National Park Service, have developed land management standards that ensure enough habitat to sustain grizzly populations now and into the future. Through state management, there will be consistent public education, law enforcement and population monitoring. All federal and state agencies are pledged to maintain a viable grizzly population and specific monitoring objectives have been put in place with which to measure this pledge. An interagency committee, this year chaired by Idaho Fish and Game Director Steve Huffaker, regularly meets to review both progress and problems.

The Idaho and National wildlife federations have endorsed the proposal to delist grizzlies because the population is healthy and growing, and because of the comprehensive program that has been developed for continued good management. While both organizations recognize that grizzlies will always present management challenges, the framework has been put in place that will allow Idahoans to meet these challenges in ways that benefit both people and wildlife.

Tom France is director and counsel for the National Wildlife Federation in Missoula, Mont.

http://www.idahostatesman.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20051127/NEWS0503/511270322/1052/NEWS05

 

[Ithaca 37]

It's too risky to gamble on the future of Yellowstone grizzlies. That's why almost every U.S. conservation organization opposes the government's premature proposal to revoke the bears' protection under the Endangered Species Act. Delisting bears will loosen restrictions on development, oil and gas drilling, and logging on land that bears need to survive. Until these mounting threats are addressed and stronger protections are adopted in state and national forest plans, delisting the bears will be a recipe for extinction.

Grizzly bears are the slowest reproducing mammal in North America and have already been eliminated from 99 percent of their former range. Last year, the death rate of grizzlies in the Northern Rockies hit a 15-year high. Even a slight increase — as little as 3 percent — in the number of females killed annually could be a death sentence for the entire population.

Right now, Wyoming officials are pressing to allow the killing of grizzlies at an unsustainable rate. Four counties, which would assume more authority over grizzlies if the bears are delisted, have passed resolutions barring bears within their borders. That will mean more dead bears in the state where most bears live.

Pressures are mounting on national forest lands, especially for energy development in Wyoming. Under new Bush administration rules, forest plans will not be legally enforceable. Thus, the federal government can't guarantee protections for grizzlies after delisting. State plans are also risky because of uncertainties over funding. The cost of grizzly management is expected to increase by $1.2 million per year if the bears are delisted. Who will pick up the tab?

Another threat to Yellowstone grizzlies is their geographic isolation. They survive on an ecological island surrounded by a rising sea of development. Experts maintain that the population is too small for long-term health unless they can interbreed with other populations. The delisting plan proposes to address this problem by importing two bears every 10 years. That's not natural recovery. Instead of delisting bears, we need to protect additional habitat and to connect Yellowstone to other grizzly populations.

Grizzly bears are the last surviving icon of an American wilderness that once stretched from coast to coast. We owe it to our children and grandchildren to ensure that they have the opportunity to glimpse grizzlies in the wild.

Yellowstone's grizzlies aren't ready to be delisted. Let's not risk turning one of America's greatest conservation success stories into a tragedy.

Louisa Willcox is Wild Bears Project director for the Natural Resources Defense Council in Livingston, Mont. She has worked in grizzly conservation for more than 20 years. For more information, see www.NRDC.org.

http://www.idahostatesman.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20051127/NEWS0503/511270323/1052/NEWS05

 

[ELKCHSR]

Good posts Ithica!

It's too risky to gamble on the future of Yellowstone grizzlies. That's why almost every U.S. conservation organization opposes the government's premature proposal to revoke the bears' protection under the Endangered Species Act. , delisting the bears will be a recipe for extinction.

Yellowstone's grizzlies aren't ready to be delisted. Let's not risk turning one of America's greatest conservation success stories into a tragedy.

This right here say's it all in respect to whether the grizzlies will be allowed to be managed properly if even at all...

and the excuse is to save the grizzly from "EXTINCTION" when in fact that is far from the truth.

It really comes down to the nitty gritty when you look at it.

As with the Spotted Owl, the bears are only a pawn in the bigger scheme of things in a move to protect every thing else from any use...

Delisting bears will loosen restrictions on development, oil and gas drilling, and logging on land that bears need to survive. Until these mounting threats are addressed and stronger protections are adopted in state and national forest plans