Crossings Magazine

Bearly a Problem
by Piper Wallingford

When the United States. government placed the grizzly bear on the Endangered Species List in 1975, only one thousand of the North American Bears remained in the wild. The range of the bears once spread throughout the continent, from the Mexican border to the far reaches of Canada and Alaska. Today, the bears survive in two percent of their original territory, mostly Canada and the northern United States. Habitat destruction has minimized the areas where bears can survive, and the continued human expansion continues to decrease their territory. Most grizzlies now live on federally protected lands, such as state parks, but human interaction continues to threaten the bears and place them in danger of extinction.

As settlers developed the West, less land became available for the extensive territory of grizzly bears, which can range up to almost three hundred square miles. Grizzly bears tend to be aggressive and will protect their territory, even against wolves or mountain lions. Although grizzly bears will rarely attack humans, early settlers would kill the bears in order to protect property and livestock. Hunting grizzly bears as game also remained popular until the Endangered Species Act of 1973. Grizzly bears have an extremely low reproductive rate, and will often not mate for up to five years. Human encroachment and hunting decreased the likelihood of a bear finding a mate, further decreasing the grizzly population.

Recently, the grizzly bear population has begun to increase, and an estimated 1,500 now roam the lower 48 states, with as many as six hundred in Yellowstone National Park. Unfortunately, as the grizzly bear population continues to grow, human interaction increases. Bears will often rummage through trash-cans or kill livestock and household pets in order to eat, placing additional strain on human tolerance of the large animals. The large bears, which can weigh more than eight hundred pounds, have even mauled hunters who encounter the bears in the wild. Although many applaud the bear's comeback and anticipate further recovery, others are wary of the risk that the grizzly poses to humans. Vic Workman, the fish, wildlife and parks commissioner for Montana worries that the increasing population may be dangerous. "It's getting out of whack. We've got too many bears," he says.

A possible suggestion is to remove the remaining protections, allowing the grizzly bear to become suitable for hunting. If hunted, the grizzly bear population would learn to avoid human areas and pose less of a threat to human safety. Grizzly bears near Yellowstone recently lost their status as Threatened Species, meaning that hunting could possibly begin within the next year, although the park would allow hunters to kill only a small number. Because grizzly bears are omnivorous, they can survive on vegetable matter. Usually however, small mammals, fish, insects, and even larger mammals such as elk form a large part of their diet. By culling the population by a small amount, bears would also be less likely to starve as their population increases but available hunting range remains the same. This would also protect human livestock and fragile wild populations from over hunting.

Conservation groups suggest that hunting would most likely be a short-term solution. While culling the population would decrease the number of bears in an area, it would not directly address the cause of the population growth. Climate and the availability of food affect the numbers of grizzly bears that exist in the wild, meaning that the recent increase in population could be an anomaly instead of a growth trend. In Yellowstone, a recent drought forced the bears away from the park in order to find food, reducing the population. The conservation director of the Greater Yellowstone Coalition, Craig Kenworthy, observed that "spikes in bear attacks generally coincide with a shortage of food or other unfavorable environmental conditions." The recent grizzly attacks could be associated with the drought, meaning that hunting would not necessarily reduce the risk of danger to humans.

Kenworthy also remarked that "What we don't want to do is have a hunt and knock the numbers down and then find out we're still having the same number of conflicts." If researchers can contribute the recent attacks to a source other than the growing grizzly population, then hunting could destroy the conservation progress already made.

Conservationists are hesitant to support grizzly bear hunting as the spike is most likely not an indication of a flourishing population. Christopher Servheen of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service said, "It would take at least five more years of research to show the bears' progress is not fleeting." More information is required because the population numbers alone are not enough to measure the recovery progress of the bears. Unfortunately, time is one thing that may not be available to the grizzly. In Yellowstone, hunting may not start for a year, but it would be far too soon according to Servheen. Reducing the population without having necessary data could have a drastic impact on a species that is still struggling to survive.

To contact Piper Wallingford for comments or for a list of sources, send an e-mail to piperwallingford@crossingsmagazine.org below:

Name

E-mail address

Location

Phone Number [optional]

Comments











				Bearly a Problem by Piper Wallingford When the United States. government placed the grizzly bear on the Endangered Species List in 1975, only one thousand of the North American Bears remained in the wild. The range of the bears once spread throughout the continent, from the Mexican border to the far reaches of Canada and Alaska. Today, the bears survive in two percent of their original territory, mostly Canada and the northern United States. Habitat destruction has minimized the areas where bears can survive, and the continued human expansion continues to decrease their territory. Most grizzlies now live on federally protected lands, such as state parks, but human interaction continues to threaten the bears and place them in danger of extinction. As settlers developed the West, less land became available for the extensive territory of grizzly bears, which can range up to almost three hundred square miles. Grizzly bears tend to be aggressive and will protect their territory, even against wolves or mountain lions. Although grizzly bears will rarely attack humans, early settlers would kill the bears in order to protect property and livestock. Hunting grizzly bears as game also remained popular until the Endangered Species Act of 1973. Grizzly bears have an extremely low reproductive rate, and will often not mate for up to five years. Human encroachment and hunting decreased the likelihood of a bear finding a mate, further decreasing the grizzly population. Recently, the grizzly bear population has begun to increase, and an estimated 1,500 now roam the lower 48 states, with as many as six hundred in Yellowstone National Park. Unfortunately, as the grizzly bear population continues to grow, human interaction increases. Bears will often rummage through trash-cans or kill livestock and household pets in order to eat, placing additional strain on human tolerance of the large animals. The large bears, which can weigh more than eight hundred pounds, have even mauled hunters who encounter the bears in the wild. Although many applaud the bear's comeback and anticipate further recovery, others are wary of the risk that the grizzly poses to humans. Vic Workman, the fish, wildlife and parks commissioner for Montana worries that the increasing population may be dangerous. "It's getting out of whack. We've got too many bears," he says. A possible suggestion is to remove the remaining protections, allowing the grizzly bear to become suitable for hunting. If hunted, the grizzly bear population would learn to avoid human areas and pose less of a threat to human safety. Grizzly bears near Yellowstone recently lost their status as Threatened Species, meaning that hunting could possibly begin within the next year, although the park would allow hunters to kill only a small number. Because grizzly bears are omnivorous, they can survive on vegetable matter. Usually however, small mammals, fish, insects, and even larger mammals such as elk form a large part of their diet. By culling the population by a small amount, bears would also be less likely to starve as their population increases but available hunting range remains the same. This would also protect human livestock and fragile wild populations from over hunting. Conservation groups suggest that hunting would most likely be a short-term solution. While culling the population would decrease the number of bears in an area, it would not directly address the cause of the population growth. Climate and the availability of food affect the numbers of grizzly bears that exist in the wild, meaning that the recent increase in population could be an anomaly instead of a growth trend. In Yellowstone, a recent drought forced the bears away from the park in order to find food, reducing the population. The conservation director of the Greater Yellowstone Coalition, Craig Kenworthy, observed that "spikes in bear attacks generally coincide with a shortage of food or other unfavorable environmental conditions." The recent grizzly attacks could be associated with the drought, meaning that hunting would not necessarily reduce the risk of danger to humans. Kenworthy also remarked that "What we don't want to do is have a hunt and knock the numbers down and then find out we're still having the same number of conflicts." If researchers can contribute the recent attacks to a source other than the growing grizzly population, then hunting could destroy the conservation progress already made. Conservationists are hesitant to support grizzly bear hunting as the spike is most likely not an indication of a flourishing population. Christopher Servheen of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service said, "It would take at least five more years of research to show the bears' progress is not fleeting." More information is required because the population numbers alone are not enough to measure the recovery progress of the bears. Unfortunately, time is one thing that may not be available to the grizzly. In Yellowstone, hunting may not start for a year, but it would be far too soon according to Servheen. Reducing the population without having necessary data could have a drastic impact on a species that is still struggling to survive. To contact Piper Wallingford for comments or for a list of sources, send an e-mail to piperwallingford@crossingsmagazine.org below: Name E-mail address Location Phone Number [optional] Comments