Agency rules on conflicting petitions
The United States Fish and Wildlife Service rejected two conflicting petitions regarding the federal protection status of grizzly bears in the Cabinet-Yaak Ecosystem.
The first petition, filed by Alliance for the Wild Rockies Dec. 17, 2014, sought to move the Cabinet-Yaak grizzlies from threatened to endangered status, triggering additional protections for the animals and their habitat. The second petition, filed in response by the Lincoln County Board of Commissioners July 27, 2015, sought to remove the bears from the federal recovery protections list.
“This is obviously not the outcome we wanted,” said Lincoln County Commissioner Mark Peck. “But it is the outcome we expected.”
The agency ruled Alliance for the Wild Rockies failed to provide substantial information to support their claim that the species should be up-listed to endangered, pointing out a number of instances in which reviewers felt the organization misstated data and took other information out of context.
In the petition, AWR claimed the reclassification of the Cabinet-Yaak bears to endangered was warranted due to a “present or threatened destruction, modification or curtailment of the species habitat or range.” Part of the claim was based upon logging activities, including road-building, in areas perceived to be grizzly bear habitat. The agency rejected the claim.
“In addition, the petitioner claims that ‘today’s grizzlies remain only in large tracts of relatively undisturbed land,’” the finding read. “Our radio-collar data shows this is not true as detailed movement from GPS radio-collars has now shown. Certainly, bears persisted in large and undisturbed tracts of land before they were listed and before any conservation intervention. However, we now know that grizzly bears use multiple use lands in wilderness and roadless areas.”
Another factor required for reclassification is natural or man-made factors potentially affecting the species’ continued existence. The agency ruled the Alliance not only failed to provide substantial information to support their claim, but also misused the information presented.
“The sources cited in the petition do not provide substantial information to support the claim that small populations warrant reclassification of the Cabinet-Yaak grizzly bear,” the finding read. “The petitioner misuses and misstates data.”
The agency also rejected the counter-petition filed by Lincoln County, essentially mandating a maintenance of the status quo protections for grizzly bears and grizzly habitat.
“Under the Endangered Species Act, a species may be considered for delisting when it is no longer endangered or likely to become endangered in the foreseeable future in all or a significant portion of its range,” the finding read. “The Cabinet-Yaak grizzly bear population appears to be responding to recovery actions, including improvements in habitat protections and a decline in human-caused mortality since 2007. Most notably, as of 2014, we have a positive trend in the native bear population, which has improved from a declining trend since 1999. However, not all recovery targets are being met. Both the total and the female mortality limits were exceeded in two out of six years...Augmentation is expected to continue to bolster the population in the future, both with future additions of bear, and as augmented individuals and their offspring continue to reproduce...Based on the best scientific and commercial information available, we determined that threatened status is still warranted.”
Peck said he was disappointed with the decision, but that the county came out on top, as they now have legal standing in any future litigation on this subject.
“The most important part of this is that we’ve jumped into this issue with both feet,” he said. “The county has official standing in any future litigation related to this issue. Even though we didn’t win, the grizzly bear isn’t being given endangered status, either.”
Peck added the expressed goal of Alliance for the Wild Rockies is the wrong approach to maintaining grizzly bear habitat.
“I disagree with their approach,” he said. “I think we need more targeted timber harvesting, especially thinning, to help create and maintain bear habitat. That doesn’t mean we just abandon more land, it means we engage in more active forest and habitat management, which creates better habitat for the bears and other wildlife.”