Grizzlies join wolves under federal protection



Two weeks after a sheepherder was mauled by a grizzly bear in the Upper Green, a federal judge has ruled the bears didn’t receive sufficient protection under state and federal management plans and ordered them back onto the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s (FWS) endangered species list.

Judge Donald Molloy said in his Sept. 21 ruling from U.S. District Court in Missoula, Mont., the grizzlies are endangered by FWS’ lack of “enforceable standards” in its Conservation Strategy; therefore, state and national forest plans and standards are flawed as well.

The Greater Yellowstone grizzly was delisted in 2007 after recovery population goals were met, but environmental groups have contested that move and sued FWS and the Department of the Interior. This suit was brought by Montana’s Greater

Yellowstone Coalition; a similar suit in Idaho is pending.

This means the end, for now, of Wyoming Game & Fish’s management plan with a designated Primary Conservation Area and as-yet unopened hunting seasons for the Greater Yellowstone grizzly, which has spread throughout the Yellowstone area and is now overflowing into outlying private and public lands.

Judge Molloy’s decision to relist “took effect immediately,” said Eric Keszler, G&F spokesman.

“We’re not really sure how it’s going to affect our management of grizzly bears – we'll see how that comes out before we make any decisions,” he said. “We’re basically operating as we did before grizzly bears were delisted (in 2007).”

G&F had taken over the bears’ management with programs and guidelines, including conflict resolution, public education, research and monitoring.

In other situations such as a nuisance bear at a campground or near residences, G&F will first have to meet with FWS and get permission to manage these situations.

“We have to get signed off from Fish and Wildlife Service before removing bears,” Keszler said. “We can deal with that bear, we just have to have permission from them before we can do that.”

The state agency also compensated livestock and property owners for destruction and depredation because the grizzly became “trophy” big game in Wyoming. Compensation will probably continue, according to Keszler.

“As I understand it, that’s still in the state law, that they’re eligible for compensation,” he said.

However, despite the progress made in Wyoming to manage grizzlies as well as possible, Judge Molloy ruled its plan is “premised on monitoring and future actions” with “general management guidelines for habitat and managing nuisance bears, which cannot be legally enforced because guidelines are discretionary.”

In the most recent grizzly depredations in the Upper Green, G&F personnel had stated they were looking for the grizzly sow with two cubs that attacked a sheepherder and killed two sheep on Sept. 14. They had responded to the scene before daylight and investigated what took place and concluded the attack was natural aggressive behavior.

G&F bear management personnel said they were considering a wide variety of factors before deciding whether the bear or bears involved in livestock losses in the Upper Green would be relocated or

removed.

Now the Greater Yellowstone grizzly has the same status as Wyoming’s gray wolves, which remain under federal protection after being delisted more than once.

The most recent wolf relisting decision came last year, also in Judge Molloy’s courtroom, where he ruled state and FWS plans did not ensure the species’ viability. Northern Rockies wolves were delisted with the exception of Wyoming. In another ongoing suit filed against that “piecemeal” delisting, Molloy allowed hunting seasons to continue in Idaho and Montana but noted he believed the conservation-coalition plaintiffs had a case to send the region’s wolves back to federal endangered protection.

FWS is still mulling its options as to whether it will continue to battle for partial wolf delisting or fold its cards after Molloy wrote that decision. Now FWS has another decision to make – whether it will appeal or revise its grizzly delisting final rule.

While Gov. Dave Freudenthal and the state’s Congressional Delegation blasted Judge Molloy’s ruling, Wyoming Attorney General Bruce Salzburg was more circumspect in what the state might – or could – do next legally.

“As in the wolf litigation, the case was filed by a conservation organization against the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service/Department of the Interior,” he stated. “The litigation challenged the legality of a rule which was promulgated by that federal agency. The State of Wyoming, and others, intervened in the case because we all have an interest in the subject matter. However, whether to appeal, or accept the ruling, is a decision that is principally in the hands of the Department of the Interior. That decision has not yet been made.”

Salzburg said he expects there will be conversations between the state and FWS about the issue.

Judge Molloy also wrote in his grizzly decision that FWS had failed to consider the loss of whitebark pine (the nuts are favored by the omnivorous grizzly) to “global warming and other causes” such as fires, pine beetles and white pine blister rust.

“Plaintiff next asserts (FWS) did not adequately consider the impacts on whitebark pine … an important source of food for grizzlies in the Greater Yellowstone Area and a large decline in whitebark pine will negatively impact the grizzly population,” he wrote in his 46-page ruling. “(FWS) disagrees, claiming the best available science shows grizzly bears will adjust to any declines in whitebark pines.”

However, the judge pointed out studies the FWS relied on for its arguments also show “a relationship between grizzly bear survival and whitebark pine availability” that the agency “downplayed” in its court briefs.

Keszler said Wyoming can’t replace whitebark pine habitat but said the state is “pretty confident the grizzly bear will be able to expand without whitebark pine.”

“There might be some things we could do to help, probably not a lot, but grizzly bears are omnivores – they can make up for the loss of one food source with another. Putting them on the Endangered Species List won’t help the whitebark pine though.”

As for the current wolf litigation status in Judge Molloy’s courtroom, FWS has noted his statements that the coalition represented by Earthjustice is likely to win its case for relisting all gray wolves.

“The federal court denied the preliminary injunction motion … to stop the 2009 regulated gray wolf hunts in Idaho and Montana. However, in issuing his order the judge indicated that his preliminary review of the overall delisting case raised questions about the (FWS) approach of conferring ESA protections to a ‘significant portion of the range’” rather than delisting the entire species,” noted the Wyoming Wolf Weekly.

“(FWS) will carefully evaluate the court’s order and confer with the Department of the Interior and Department of Justice to determine any appropriate next steps.”

The Sept. 25 wolf report also stated based on preliminary reports through September, Wildlife Services confirmed wolves had killed 177 sheep and 17 cattle, mostly in western Wyoming. Producers are applying to G&F or Defenders of Wildlife for compensation, depending on the kill locations.

To date, Wyoming Wildlife Services has killed 28 wolves in lethal control actions, also mainly in western packs.



For the complete article see the 09-29-2009 issue.

Click here to purchase an electronic version of the 09-29-2009 paper.