The National Park Service and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service are seeking public comment on a proposal to see grizzly bears recovered in the North Cascades ecosystem/NPS file
A draft plan crafted to see grizzly bears restored to the North Cascades Ecosystem of Washington state proposes to release bears that would be treated as a "nonessential experimental population," a designation that would provide more options for managing the species, which currently is protected under the Endangered Species Act. The last confirmed sighting of a grizzly bear in the U.S. portion of the ecosystem was in 1996.
“The time has come for the grizzly bear to return to its habitat to take its place in the Indigenous ecosystem,” Scott Schuyler, policy representative for the Upper Skagit Tribe, whose territory lies within the recovery zone, said after the plan was released by the National Park Service and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. “The Upper Skagit successfully coexisted with grizzly bears for thousands of years, and we should once more.”
The North Cascades is one of the largest wild areas remaining in the lower 48 states, encompassing more than 95,000 square miles in north-central Washington. It includes North Cascades National Park and large areas of surrounding national forest. According to scientists, the area contains prime habitat that could support approximately 280 grizzly bears.
For more than two decades, biologists have been working to recover the North Cascades' grizzlies, a threatened species. And while more than a few reports of grizzly sightings in the ecosystem that stretches north to Canada are received by state and federal officials each year, most turn out to be black bears.
The draft Environmental Impact Study proposal holds three alternatives: One that wouldn't adopt a restoration plan, one that would help grizzly recovery and manage the bears under the Endangered Species Act, and one that would help grizzly recovery but treat the bears as an experimental population under section 10(j) of the Endangered Species Act that would provide "agencies with greater management flexibility should conflict situations arise." For instance, a 10j designation would allow "deterrence, incidental take, research and recovery actions, relocation of grizzly bears, preemptive relocation to prevent a conflict that appears imminent or in attempt to break habituated behavior of bears lingering near human-occupied areas, and conditioned lethal take," the draft EA said.
While the National Park Service is taking public comment through November 13 on the recovery options, the Fish and Wildlife Service is separately seeking public input on the proposed 10(j) rule outlining what those management strategies for grizzly bears might look like, if that alternative were to be selected.
“If this part of our natural heritage is restored, it should be done in a way that ensures communities, property, and the animals can all coexist peacefully. A 10(j) experimental designation could provide the tools to do that,” said Hugh Morrison, Fish and Wildlife Service regional director.
If either of the restoration options is selected, the NPS and the FWS would capture bears from populations in either interior British Columbia or the Northern Continental Divide Ecosystem. Approximately three to seven captured grizzly bears would be released into the North Cascades Ecosystem each year over roughly 5 to 10 years, with a goal of establishing an initial population of 25 grizzly bears. After the initial population of 25 grizzly bears has been reached, an adaptive management phase would allow additional bears to be released into the ecosystem over time to address mortality, population and demographic trends, genetic limitations, and distribution or to adjust the population’s sex ratio to improve reproductive success. The proposed action is expected to result in a population of approximately 200 grizzly bears within 60 to 100 years.
The Park Service said grizzly bears roamed across the North Cascades for thousands of years "as an essential part of the ecosystem, distributing native plant seeds and keeping other wildlife populations in balance. In the 20th century, humans nearly hunted them to extinction."
“Restoring grizzlies to their historic range in the North Cascades is an opportunity to redress a legacy of human- wildlife conflict and enable these incredible animals to inspire future generations," said Kathleen Callaghy, the Northwest Representative for Defenders of Wildlife.
At the National Parks Conservation Association, Graham Taylor said that, "Americans love our national parks because they are spectacular places where wildlife can thrive in abundance. Restoring grizzly bears to the North Cascades will enshrine the wild character of the park, and honor our shared commitment to coexist with all creatures, big and small."
Three years ago another effort to move grizzly restoration forward was halted by then-Interior Secretary David Bernhardt, who said "the people who live and work in north central Washington have made their voices clear that they do not want grizzly bears reintroduced into the North Cascades. Grizzly bears are not in danger of extinction, and Interior will continue to build on its conservation successes managing healthy grizzly bear populations across their existing range.”
Last fall the Biden administration restarted efforts to determine whether a recovery plan should be launched for the North Cascades.
“We are looking for the public’s help in selecting the best path forward as we evaluate grizzly bear recovery on these federal lands,” North Cascades National Park Superintendent Don Striker said Thursday.
Details of the draft plan, and a place to comment, can be found at this website. In the coming weeks, the two federal agencies also plan to schedule public meetings to discuss the alternatives.
Comments
I think it's an amazing step forward to reintroduce the grizzly to the Cascade's. Montana, Wyoming and Idaho have benefitted significantly and the ecosystem is being brought back to its original state.
As a Certified California Naturalist I understand the importance of apex predators in the natural environment and how they help to reshape the places they inhabit. Returning Grizzlies to the Cascades will repair the damage done to the environment when they were eextripated from their natural habitat. California especially needs its signature bear returned to prominence and this is the first step forward. Return the Grizzlies.
Returning grizzlies to the NC is a mistake.
We need to recognize that the NC is no longer the "ecosystem" that it was when grizzlies roamed there. It's now full of reservoirs, campgrounds, resorts, trails, power lines, recreationalists, ski trails, tourists, and highways. It's clearly no longer a "habitat" or a "natural environment" in which grizzlies could survive let alone thrive.
It's terribly ironic that those most vocal about returning grizzlies to the NC don't live or work there. Reintroducing grizzlies to the NC is a recipe for tragedy after tragedy that will ultlimately lead to the needless deaths of countless grizzlies.
PLEASE folks, think about the consequences of this crazy plan. Also, consider that this plan is likely just a cynical effort to keep the grizzly on the endagered list just as they're about to be delisted after successful efforts to manage griz populations in the Greater Yellowstone and Northern Continental Divide Ecosystems.
We should follow the SCIENCE, not politics or radical agendas.
I prefer the experimental population want it seems the most pragmatic choice.
I feel that an attempt in reintroducing the grizzly bear back into Washington State is a disastrous move, as the brown & black bears have already established the apex niche once held by the vacated grizzlys. The available game sources have changed since the grizzlies have vacated at the turn of the century. There has been one female grizzly along with a cub recorded years back sighted in the Cascade Moutain range years back that made KREM 2 News in Spokane, but this was a special instance and worked for However, one of the reintroduced grizzlies on a native reservation above Spokane Washington was harassing a family having a meal in from of their home and the bear would not leave them alone. The set of circumstances dictated that the homeowner had to shoot the bear in self-defense in order to protect his family from repeated approaches by the bear. I feel that wild game prey to grizzlies has changed since more population began to accumulate in the 18 to early 1900s and this is why you will find the preponderance of grizzlies in Canada or Montanna, Dakotas rather than Washington State. Simply put, anymore Washington State is not geared for the grizzly, other than as said special circumstance having to do with protective cub raising in remote parts of the mountain ranges. I feel that the reintroduction is tantamount to catastrophe as these bears might not know or realize their behavioral limitations. Thank you DJB Wash State citizen.