WHITNEY ROYSTER Star-Tribune environmental reporter | Posted: Saturday, April 9, 2005 12:00 am
JACKSON - Grizzly bears should be discouraged from inhabiting the Wyoming, Salt River and southern Wind River ranges, state wildlife officials recommended this week.
And Wyoming should have more latitude in managing bears outside core habitat once they're removed from federal protection, the state Game and Fish Department says.
The department has analyzed 17,572 public comments regarding its proposed grizzly bear management plan, and several themes rose to the top. These ideas were incorporated into recommendations for the revised plan, which will be presented to Game and Fish commissioners April 26 in Casper.
John Emmerich, assistant wildlife division chief for Game and Fish, said his agency will ask commissioners for a motion adopting the recommendations, but commissioners may accept some but not all.
He also said the recommendations have been made in concert with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, which is currently managing the bear, and will comply with federal requirements. The federal agency would remove grizzlies from Endangered Species Act protection only after it approves of the state's post-delisting management plan.
"We haven't been doing this in a vacuum," Emmerich said.
Game and Fish officials' recommendation includes a plan that would "actively and consistently" discourage grizzly bear dispersal and occupancy in the Wyoming Range, Salt River Range and southern Winds - "and other areas of high conflict potential off national forests in northwest Wyoming."
Also, the original concept of a secondary conservation area, one where bears would be managed to exist so long as they were not getting into conflicts, is eliminated. Instead, the recommendation calls for only two zones - one the already-established recovery zone, the other an outer area where the state would have more latitude in how it manages bear occupancy, density and conflicts.
Emmerich said those potential bear areas would be overlapped with human-use areas - places where oil and gas, timber and recreation activity takes place - to determine where the bear should be allowed. Heavy hunting would be used to eliminate bear populations in those areas deemed unsuitable.
Two types of management
Louisa Willcox, wild bears project director with the Natural Resources Defense Council, said the elimination of the secondary area does not change the on-the-ground management dramatically. Areas identified previously as a secondary conservation area would still be managed to allow bears, she said.
Still, she said the concern exists that food sources are threatened in prime habitat, possibly forcing bears to other areas - such as those identified as being "off limits" to bears in the recommendation - to survive.
Emmerich said areas like the Wyoming and Salt River ranges present too high a possibility for human/bear conflicts, despite their possible suitable habitat.
The primary conservation area extends in a radius around Yellowstone National Park into the Bridger-Teton National Forest down to Togwotee Pass, the Teton Wilderness and Dubois. It extends east to just west of Cody.
The secondary conservation area, recommended to be absolved, extends farther south on the Bridger-Teton, down the Snake River and Hoback canyons and into the Absaroka Range.
Doug Thompson, Fremont County commissioner who has been an opponent of expanding grizzly bear range, said removing the secondary conservation area is a good step because bears in areas south of Dubois would be in conflict with people and sheep ranches.
"If they'll just manage them within the primary conservation area, that will be appropriate, and then discourage populations in and around (Dubois) - that would be good," he said. "Getting rid of the secondary conservation area is a very good thing."
Mark Preiss, executive director of the Wyoming Outdoor Council, said he was disappointed Game and Fish is recommending to close off areas in the southern ranges. He said people want to see grizzly bears delisted, but a healthy population has to be ensured, and the existing proposal "would get us closer to that."
Public comments
According to the department, individual public comments from Wyoming overwhelmingly indicated support for limiting grizzly bears to wilderness areas next to Yellowstone National Park, and opposition to expansion of grizzlies into the Wind River, Wyoming and Gros Ventre ranges.
Comments were classified as "very high frequency," meaning received in the thousands; high frequency, meaning the hundreds; and moderate frequency, meaning between 10 and 100.
Individual comments from Wyoming residents regarding distribution of bears classified as "high frequency" included recommendations not to increase bear occupancy areas, to keep bears inside Yellowstone, and to allow recovery in the Wyoming Range and other southern mountain ranges.
Those analyzing public comments said the majority of residents had a central theme of "Not in my backyard."
"The single most prevalent comment from this group indicated grizzly bears should be restricted to Yellowstone National Park and adjacent wilderness areas," the special report said.
Later, the document said, "Unlike in past efforts, the tenor of many resident comments, especially those from Sublette, Fremont, and Hot Springs counties, was hostile. Many comments indicated the agency wants to put people in harm's way via the grizzly bear so public and private lands can be managed exclusively for wildlife. The most extreme comments threatened acts of civil disobedience, threatened a license boycott, and hinted at future legislative initiatives."
The document also said a portion of the public does not clearly understand the agency's limited role and authority in managing grizzly bears while it is listed under the Endangered Species Act.
Nonresidents "by and large" said the proposal will not provide sufficient area to sustain a grizzly bear population in perpetuity, the document said, nor do they feel the proposal has adequate measures to mitigate human/grizzly conflicts.
The special report said the 12,374 comments from nonresidents was the highest ever recorded by the department. There were 5,999 received for the state's draft wolf management plan in 2002.
Petitions also played a role, with 26.8 percent of the written comments in the form of signatures on petitions.
The grizzly bear was listed as threatened in 1975, when the population dwindled to about 200 bears in the Yellowstone area. There are now about 680 grizzly bears in the greater Yellowstone area.
Environmental reporter Whitney Royster can be reached at (307) 734-0260 or at royster@mail.trib.com.
What's next
* The Wyoming Game and Fish Department will present its grizzly bear recommendations to Game and Fish commissioners April 26 in Casper.
* Approved recommendations or changes will be presented again to Game and Fish commissioners in a final grizzly bear management plan in July for final vote.
* The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service anticipates releasing a draft delisting rule in June, and a final in December to release grizzly bear management to states.
Want to learn more?
To read a copy of the grizzly bear occupancy special report, go online to http://gf.state.wy.us.