Grizzly bear / Gregory "Slobirdr" Smith ; Black bear / Jitze Couperus ; Polar bear / Pexels
For the first time, scientists have observed three American bear species—the black bear, polar bear and grizzly bear—using the same habitat in Canada's Wapusk National Park.
"Scientifically, it has never been documented anywhere," Doug Clark of the University of Saskatchewan told the Canadian Press.
<p>
Using remote cameras, Clark and his research team documented 401 bear-visits of all three species (366 from polar bears, 25 from black bears and 10 from grizzlies) at three camps in the national park from 2011–2017. The <a href="http://www.nrcresearchpress.com/doi/abs/10.1139/AS-2018-0013#.W_hKypM3mqR" target="_blank">findings</a> were published this week in the journal <em>Arctic Science</em>.<br></p><p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-twitter_embed">
</p><div id="c18d4" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="PIZ12J1576662629"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="1065694549018857472" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">We found grizzly, black and polar bears together for the first time: "This particular story of the three bears isn’… https://t.co/K6CWiB0tnq</div> — Nunatsiaq News (@Nunatsiaq News)<a href="https://twitter.com/NunatsiaqNews/statuses/1065694549018857472">1542916354.0</a></blockquote></div>
<p></p><p>The presence of polar and black bears was not unusual. After all, Wapusk National Park is home to one of the world's largest maternity denning areas for polar bears. The park also lies north of a forested region, where black bears call home.<br></p><p>
It was the number of grizzly visits that was the biggest surprise.
</p><p>
<span></span>"These observations add to a growing body of evidence that grizzlies are undergoing a substantial range increase in northern Canada and the timing of our observations suggests denning locally," the authors wrote.
</p><p>
Clark delved deeper into the study in an essay for <a href="https://theconversation.com/we-found-grizzly-black-and-polar-bears-together-for-the-first-time-106216" target="_blank">The Conversation</a>:<br>
</p><blockquote>
Three dynamic ecosystems—forest, tundra and ocean—converge at Wapusk, and all are changing quickly
<a href="https://oaarchive.arctic-council.org/handle/11374/1838" target="_blank">as the Arctic warms</a>.<br>
<br>
What we've seen in Wapusk is consistent with <a href="https://doi.org/10.1093/icb/44.2.152" target="_blank">how researchers expect northern carnivore populations to respond</a> to climate change.
</blockquote><p>
The study adds more evidence that grizzly bears are showing up in places where they are not usually found. Other scientists have suggested that increased sightings of so-called "pizzly" or "grolar" bears—or grizzly-polar hybrids—are the result of grizzly bears in Alaska and Canada expanding north due to the warming environment, thus bringing them in contact with polar bears.
</p><p>
<span></span>"The combination of warmer temperatures and vegetation growth means there is more overlap between the species and I'd expect that overlap to increase," Chris Servheen, a grizzly bear expert at the University of Montana, told the <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/may/18/pizzly-grolar-bear-grizzly-polar-hybrid-climate-change" target="_blank">Guardian</a> in 2016.
</p><p>
It is not currently clear if the three bear species are interacting with each other, or what effect their combined presence has on the larger environment.
</p><p>
"How they interact is a really big question," Clark told the Canadian Press. "There's all kinds of things that could go on."
</p><p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-twitter_embed">
</p><div id="9f203" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="LG4E6W1576662629"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="1059925651866546176" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">Sighting of Sperm Whales in Arctic Waters 'Really Shocking' https://t.co/xEW4KHZOol
#ClimateChange #globalwarming… https://t.co/PO9RE8yCED</div> — Sea Shepherd SSCS (@Sea Shepherd SSCS)<a href="https://twitter.com/SeaShepherdSSCS/statuses/1059925651866546176">1541540942.0</a></blockquote></div>
<p></p>
Read More
Show Less
EcoWatch Daily Newsletter
A grizzly bear in Yellowstone National Park. Jim Peaco / National Park Service
A federal judge restored endangered species protections for grizzly bears in and around Yellowstone National Park on Monday, The Huffington Post reported, putting a permanent halt to plans by Wyoming and Idaho to launch the first Yellowstone-area grizzly hunt in four decades.
<p style="">U.S. District Judge Dana Christensen had already placed a temporary restraining order on the hunts, which would have started Sept. 1 and allowed for the killing of up to 23 bears, while he considered the larger question of whether Endangered Species Act protections should be restored. The bears' management will now return to the federal government.</p>
<p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-twitter_embed">
</p><div id="59276" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="P5PTRU1576663349"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="1044372500988276737" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">Grizzlies Saved: Court Stops Trophy Hunt of Yellowstone’s Iconic Bears https://t.co/IdqQNFNZcL via @earthjustice</div> — Sierra Club (@Sierra Club)<a href="https://twitter.com/SierraClub/statuses/1044372500988276737">1537832782.0</a></blockquote></div>
<p></p>
<p style="">Christensen <a href="http://pdf.wildearthguardians.org/support_docs/Dkt_266_Opinion.pdf" target="_blank">wrote in his ruling</a> that his decision was "not about the ethics of hunting." Rather, he agreed with environmental and tribal groups that the Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) had not considered the genetic health of other lower-48 grizzly populations when it <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/grizzly-bear-endangered-species-2446914651.html" target="_self">delisted</a> the Yellowstone area bears in 2017.<br></p><p style="">"By delisting the Greater Yellowstone grizzly without analyzing how delisting would affect the remaining members of the lower-48 grizzly designation, the Service failed to consider how reduced protections in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem would impact the other grizzly populations," Christensen wrote, according to The Huffington Post. "Thus, the Service 'entirely failed to consider an important aspect of the problem.'"</p><p style="">Bear advocates said the Yellowstone population was growing large enough to merge with other populations, which would be a win-win for the genetic diversity of all bears involved.</p><p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-rebelmouse-image">
<img type="lazy-image" data-runner-src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8xODY1NTc0OS9vcmlnaW4uanBnIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTY1NTEyMzUzNn0.Ub5ZMRRQbkhJalQyh4aBy9i697eewrf0KemdGDU9Dn4/img.jpg?width=980" id="7406e" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="189e427e2e04ce872e523db730ff5a02" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image">
<small class="image-media media-caption" placeholder="add caption...">A grizzly bear and cub in Yellowstone National Park</small><small class="image-media media-photo-credit" placeholder="add photo credit...">John Good / National Park Service</small></p><p>"The Service appropriately recognized that the population's genetic health is a significant factor demanding consideration," Christensen wrote. "However, it misread the scientific studies it relied upon, failing to recognize that all evidence suggests that the long-term viability of the Greater Yellowstone grizzly is far less certain absent new genetic material."<br></p><p style="">Native American and environmental groups applauded the decision. </p><p style="">"We have a responsibility to speak for the bears, who cannot speak for themselves," Northern Cheyenne Nation President Lawrence Killsback said in a statement Monday reported by The Huffington Post. "Today we celebrate this victory and will continue to advocate on behalf of the Yellowstone grizzly bears until the population is recovered, including within the Tribe's ancestral homeland in Montana and other states."</p><p style="">The FWS told <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/science/2018/09/25/court-restores-federal-protections-yellowstone-area-grizzly-bears/?utm_term=.542d023a1868" target="_blank">The Washington Post</a> it was reviewing the ruling.</p><p style="">"We stand behind our finding that the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem grizzly bear is biologically recovered and no longer requires protection. . . . Our determination was based on our rigorous interpretation of the law and is supported by the best available science and a comprehensive conservation strategy developed with our federal, state, and tribal partners," the FWS told The Washington Post.</p><p style="">The FWS first attempted to delist the bears in 2007, but that move was also blocked in federal court over concerns that one of the bears' food sources, whitebark pine seeds, were threatened by <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/climate-change" target="_self">climate change</a>. </p><p style="">In its 2017 ruling, the FWS said that it had reviewed the case and found the decline of the whitebark pine seeds did not pose a major threat. </p><p style="">Grizzlies in the lower 48 states were first listed as endangered in 1975, when their historic range had been reduced by 98 percent. </p><p style="">The Yellowstone grizzlies numbered fewer than 140 at the time. The population has since rebounded to about 700, according to The Washington Post.</p><p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-twitter_embed">
</p><div id="609e4" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="CICBMS1576663349"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="1035939891606110208" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">Judge Blocks First #Yellowstone -Area #Grizzly Hunt in 40 Years #hunting #huntingseason https://t.co/S4g9VuChYI</div> — EcoWatch (@EcoWatch)<a href="https://twitter.com/EcoWatch/statuses/1035939891606110208">1535822291.0</a></blockquote></div>
<p></p>
From Your Site Articles
Related Articles Around the Web
Read More
Show Less
Like many other plant-based foods and products, CBD oil is one dietary supplement where "organic" labels are very important to consumers. However, there are little to no regulations within the hemp industry when it comes to deeming a product as organic, which makes it increasingly difficult for shoppers to find the best CBD oil products available on the market.
<p>Here you can learn about the importance of organic hemp oil, why it's better for the environment, and which CBD companies actually make trustworthy products with sustainable farming processes. origins which weigh heavily on many consumers who want to buy a product that's produced in the best way possible for not only themselves to ingest, but for the environment as well through sustainable farming methods. </p><h2>What Is CBD Oil?</h2><p>First things first, CBD stands for cannabidiol, and it's a cannabinoid found within cannabis sativa plants. This plant compound is believed to have many potential benefits, and it is primarily derived from hemp plants via a CO2 extraction process. </p><p>Since CBD is extracted from industrial hemp, which contains only trace amounts of THC (the psychoactive component in cannabis plants), this means that CBD won't make you feel high like marijuana, which has much higher levels of THC that causes psychoactive effects. Instead, the effects of CBD are much more subtle and promote a general sense of calm and relaxation in most users.</p><h2>What Makes a CBD Oil Organic?</h2><p>In terms of organic labels, perhaps the most important (and prominent) certification comes from the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA). This government organization has been labeling foods as "organic" for many years, but what exactly does this certification entail? Essentially, a label indicating that a product is "USDA Organic" or "Certified Organic" means that at least 95% of the ingredients are obtained from organic sources.</p><p>For a crop to be considered organic by the USDA, it must be grown without the use of industrial solvents, irradiation, genetic engineering (GMOs), synthetic pesticides, or chemical fertilizer. Instead, farmers rely on natural substances and <a href="https://www.usda.gov/media/blog/2012/03/22/organic-101-what-usda-organic-label-means" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">mechanical, physical, or biologically based farming</a> techniques to cultivate healthy and organic crops.</p><p>Before the passage of the 2018 Farm Bill, no hemp-derived products could be dubbed as "certified organic" since the hemp plant and its extracts were still categorized as a Schedule I Controlled Substance. However, it's still difficult for CBD companies to obtain a USDA certified organic label for their products due to the legal grey area that still surrounds CBD extracts. </p><p>Because of these challenges, and due to the fact that industrial hemp has only recently become an agricultural crop, very few CBD oils are USDA certified organic. Rather, many CBD products contain hemp extracts from plants that were grown in organic conditions but may not be federally certified.</p><h2>What are the Best Organic CBD Oil Brands?</h2><p><em>Each product featured here has been independently selected by the writer. If you make a purchase using the links included, we may earn commission.</em></p><em><br></em>
<h2>Why Organic Hemp Oil Matters</h2><p>Hemp is a unique plant, not only for its rich cannabinoid content, but also for its ability to absorb a wide variety of components in soil. But this trait poses great risks when it comes to the creation of CBD products derived from hemp.</p><p>Because hemp has a high capacity for compound uptake, this means that the plants can retain <a href="https://www.remedyreview.com/industry/lab-test-results/" target="_blank">harmful chemicals like pesticides</a>, heavy metals, and other residual solvents. This is especially true when it comes to synthetic chemicals that are more toxic to humans, and difficult to remove once they have been absorbed by the hemp plant.</p><p>Organic farming practices help reduce the risk of hemp crops absorbing harsh chemicals that may later end up in CBD oil after extraction. When you're taking CBD as a wellness supplement to help alleviate your symptoms or improve your overall well-being, the last thing you want is to ingest compounds that might negatively outweigh the benefits of CBD. This is an important reason to look for third party lab test results when shopping for CBD products since these certificates of analysis can show the full cannabinoid and terpene profile of a hemp extract, as well as test results that search for the presence of any residual solvents.</p><p>In addition to creating a better end product, organic farming practices are also better for the environment. Sustainable and organic farming methods may <a href="https://www.helpguide.org/articles/healthy-eating/organic-foods.htm" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">reduce pollution, conserve water, reduce soil erosion, increase soil fertility, and use less energy</a>. The use of natural pest deterrents as opposed to chemical pesticides is also better for nearby animal populations and ecosystems.</p><h3>Organic vs. Natural</h3><p>While there are only a select few companies offering certified organic ingredients in their products, almost every brand in the CBD market creates "natural" products. The term "all-natural" or "plant-based" does not mean that a product is organic, and since hemp oil is a natural derivative of hemp plants, these products are often referred to as all-natural. However, there are some synthetic CBD oils that should be avoided because they are chemically constructed and may produce unwanted side effects that are not caused by naturally derived CBD extracts.</p><h2>What are the Benefits of Organic CBD Oil?</h2><p>There's a long list of potential CBD oil health benefits, and some of the most common wellness advantages include:</p><ul class="ee-ul"><li><a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2503660/" target="_blank">Chronic pain relief</a></li><li><a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4604171/" target="_blank">Anti-anxiety effects</a></li><li>Better sleep</li><li><a href="https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/inner-source/201901/cbd-oil-mental-health-should-you-take-it-too" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">Improvements in mood</a></li><li>Internal balance and regulation</li></ul><p>When dealing with pain, inflammation, sleep issues, and mental health struggles, it can be hard to find sufficient treatment options. The use of certain prescriptions can cause unwanted side effects, yet they are often the only solution for patients with these medical conditions. In search of other therapies, people have started to flock towards CBD oil as an alternative remedy for a variety of conditions. However, it should be noted that CBD products are not approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), and you should seek your doctor's advice before using CBD if you have a serious medical condition.</p><h2>Look at the Labels Before You Buy CBD Oil</h2><p>When you go online to buy CBD oil, you'll quickly realize there is an overwhelming number of brands that are saturating the market. It can be difficult to determine which products are truly as good as they make themselves out to be. Always look for up-to-date third-party lab tests so you know you are getting a great product, and don't hesitate to contact the brand if you have any additional questions. And if you're intent on purchasing 100% organic CBD oil, it's best to look for certified products or brands that are held to strict regulatory standards.</p><p><strong>Melena Gurganus </strong>is the Reviews Editor at EcoWatch. She is passionate health and wellness and her writing aims to help others find products they can trust. Her work has been featured in publications such as Health, Shape, Huffington Post, Cannabis Business Times, and Bustle.<br></p>
Spruce
<img type="lazy-image" data-runner-src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8yNDY4NjI3OC9vcmlnaW4uanBnIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTYyOTM2NzgzOX0.axY0HjeqRctJsR_KmDLctzDpUBLBN-oNIdqaXDb4caQ/img.jpg?width=980" id="774be" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="8379f35b1ca8a86d0e61b7d4bfc8b46e" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image" alt="spruce organic cbd oil" data-width="710" data-height="959" /><p>As one of the best brands in the business, Spruce CBD is well-known for its potent CBD oils that feature many additional beneficial phytocannabinoids. This brand works with two family-owned, sustainably focused farms in the USA (one located in Kentucky and one in North Carolina) to create its organic, small product batches. The max potency Spruce CBD oil contains 2400mg of full-spectrum CBD extract, but the brand also offers a lower strength tincture with 750mg of CBD in total.</p>
$89
CBDistillery
<img type="lazy-image" data-runner-src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8yNDcwMjkzNC9vcmlnaW4uanBnIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTYyMTU4OTM4Nn0.ypRdeDSBcE87slYrFfVrRwtJ2qGIK6FD5jBB4pndTMo/img.jpg?width=980" id="b473b" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="9930b53c9d58cb49774640a61c3e3e75" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image" alt="cbdistillery cbd oil" data-width="1244" data-height="1244" /><p>All of the products from CBDistillery are <a href="https://ushempauthority.org/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">U.S. Hemp Authority Certified</a>, and for good reason. The company only uses non-GMO and pesticide-free industrial hemp that's grown organically on Colorado farms. Its hemp oils are some of the most affordable CBD products on the market, yet they still maintain a high standard of quality. CBDistillery has a wide variety of CBD potencies across its product line (ranging from 500mg to 5000mg per bottle) and offers both full-spectrum and broad-spectrum CBD oils to give customers a completely thc-free option.</p>
$35
FAB CBD
<img type="lazy-image" data-runner-src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8yNDY4NjIyNS9vcmlnaW4uanBnIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTY2NDIwOTEyMn0.MlTjz096FJ0ev_-soK7_Z-FeQeJczWoeh9Qi9SSkHsY/img.jpg?width=980" id="04b26" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="76aa4862f44603242e318982acea6646" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image" alt="fab cbd oil" data-width="800" data-height="800" /><p>For an organic CBD oil that has it all, FAB CBD offers plenty of variety for any type of consumer. All of its products are made with zero pesticides and extracted from organically grown Colorado industrial hemp. FAB CBD oil comes in five all-natural flavors (mint, vanilla, berry, citrus, and natural) and is also available in four strengths (300, 600, 1200, and 2400mg per bottle).</p>
$39
NuLeaf Naturals
<img type="lazy-image" data-runner-src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8yNDY4NjIxOS9vcmlnaW4uanBnIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTY1NzExNTgyMX0.D6qMGYllKTsVhEkQ-L_GzpDHVu60a-tJKcio7M1Ssmc/img.jpg?width=980" id="94e4a" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="3609a52479675730893a45a82a03c71d" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image" alt="nuleaf naturals organic cbd oil" data-width="600" data-height="600" /><p>As an industry-leading brand, it comes as no surprise that NuLeaf Naturals sources its CBD extract from organic hemp plants grown on licensed farms in Colorado. The comany's CBD oils only contain two ingredients: USDA certified organic hemp seed oil and full spectrum hemp extract.</p><p>NuLeaf Naturals uses one proprietary CBD oil formula for all of its products, so you will get the same CBD potency in each tincture (60mg per mL), but can purchase different bottle sizes depending on how much you intend to use.</p>
$38.50
Charlotte's Web
<img type="lazy-image" data-runner-src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8yNDcwMjk3NS9vcmlnaW4uanBnIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTY0MzQ0NjM4N30.SaQ85SK10-MWjN3PwHo2RqpiUBdjhD0IRnHKTqKaU7Q/img.jpg?width=980" id="84700" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="a2174067dcc0c4094be25b3472ce08c8" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image" alt="charlottes web cbd oil" data-width="1244" data-height="1244" /><p>Perhaps one of the most well-known brands in the CBD landscape, Charlotte's Web has been growing sustainable hemp plants for several years. The company is currently in the process of achieving official USDA Organic Certification, but it already practices organic and sustainable cultivation techniques to enhance the overall health of the soil and the hemp plants themselves, which creates some of the highest quality CBD extracts. Charlotte's Web offers CBD oils in a range of different concentration options, and some even come in a few flavor options such as chocolate mint, orange blossom, and lemon twist.</p>
$60
From Your Site Articles
- Best CBD Oils of 2020: Reviews & Buying Guide - EcoWatch ›
- Best CBD Oil for Pain Management - Top 10 CBD Oil Review 2020 ... ›
- Best CBD for Dogs 2020 - Organic CBD Oil for Pets - EcoWatch ›
- Full Spectrum CBD Oil: What To Know - EcoWatch ›
- Charlotte's Web: A Review of the Certified B Corp CBD Brand ›
- Best CBD Waters: Plus All You Need to Know - EcoWatch ›
- The Best Water Soluble CBD Available Online - EcoWatch ›
- Best CBD for Sleep (Lab-Tested, Person-Tested Oils) - EcoWatch ›
- CBD Oil for Dogs: 7 Benefits & Treatment Guide - EcoWatch ›
- NuLeaf Naturals CBD Review | Are They Worth The Cost? - EcoWatch ›
- Best CBD Capsules & Pills - Buyer's Guide (Update for 2021) - EcoWatch ›
- Because Price Matters: Most Affordable CBD Oils of 2021 - EcoWatch ›
- Strongest CBD Oils to Buy in 2021? - EcoWatch ›
- Best CBD Oils For Pain: Top 3 Brands of 2021 - EcoWatch ›
- Best CBD Vape Pen: Top Brands of 2020 - EcoWatch ›
Related Articles Around the Web
Read More
Show Less
A federal judge on Thursday halted the first Yellowstone-area grizzly bear trophy hunts in four decades.
Wyoming and Idaho's grizzly hunt was set to begin this Saturday, Sept. 1 and would have allowed a potential kill of 23 bears outside of Yellowstone National Park.
<p>
<span></span>But U.S. District Judge Dana Christensen in Missoula, Montana granted a 14-day restraining order on the hunt, siding with wildlife advocates and Native American tribes who sued U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) after its June 2017 decision to delist grizzly bears in the greater Yellowstone area from protections under the <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/endangered-species-act" target="_blank">Endangered Species Act</a>.
</p><p>
Christensen
<a href="https://t.co/QJqyHfo5Z5" target="_blank" title="https://ejus.tc/2LBofQZ">wrote</a> that the hunt would cause irreparable harm to the animals "because once a member of an <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/endangered">endangered species</a> has been injured, the task of preserving that species becomes all the more difficult."
</p><p>
<a href="https://earthjustice.org/" target="_blank">Earthjustice</a>, an environmental law nonprofit, filed the temporary restraining order on behalf of the Northern Cheyenne Tribe, <a href="https://www.sierraclub.org" target="_blank">Sierra Club</a>, <a href="https://www.biologicaldiversity.org" target="_blank">Center for Biological Diversity</a> and <a href="https://www.npca.org" target="_blank">National Park Conservation Association</a>.
</p><p>
"As we explained to the judge today, the removal of protections for Yellowstone's iconic grizzlies was illegal. The bears should not be killed in a hunting season made possible by an illegal government decision," said Earthjustice attorney Tim Preso in a
<a href="https://earthjustice.org/news/press/2018/judge-grants-temporary-restraining-order-halting-grizzly-hunt?utm_source=social&utm_medium=twitter" target="_blank">press release</a>.
</p><p>
As EcoWatch
<a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/grizzly-bear-hunt-wyoming-2571671329.html" target="_blank">previously reported</a>, more than 200 tribal nations opposed the hunt, saying the bears are sacred to their culture, and want to move the bears to tribal lands.
</p><p>
"It's essential to protecting our religious and spiritual freedoms, and treaty rights in Yellowstone," Stan Grier, chief of the Piikani Nation and president of the Blackfoot Confederacy Chiefs told
<a href="https://www.reuters.com/article/us-yellowstone-grizzlies/first-yellowstone-area-grizzly-hunt-in-40-years-blocked-by-federal-judge-idUSKCN1LG00L" target="_blank">Reuters</a>. "This sacred being is considered to be a deity by many tribes, not a rug."
</p><p>
The restraining order allows the judge time to decide whether the federal government should reinstate federal protections for the bears.
</p><p>
Grizzlies were given federal protection in 1975, when their numbers dropped to only several hundred, compared to an historic high of 100,000 in the lower 48 states. Thanks to the Endangered Species Act, their numbers today have risen slowly to around 700.
</p><p>
USFWS delisted the bears last year, saying that their numbers have recovered to a point where federal protection is no longer needed.
</p><p>
But scientists say that the iconic animals are not ready for delisting because
<a href="http://ecowatch.com/climate-change-news/" target="_blank">climate change</a> and other human-caused factors have threatened their food sources.
</p><p>
In May, 58 prominent scientists and experts, including renowned naturalist and primatologist
<a href="http://ecowatch.com/?s=Jane+Goodall" target="_blank">Dr. Jane Goodall</a>, signed a <a href="https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B7Ec-KrsWzt4LTNNeXJvbmU5bnc/view" target="_blank">letter</a> asking USFWS to retain federal protections for the bears.
</p><p>
"Their future isn't secure yet because they face so many threats to survival," Goodall
<a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xAPnvZ_q-EE" target="_blank">said</a> then. "Two of their four major foods have all but been wiped out due to climate change, disease and invasive species. And they may be killed if they prey on livestock in their increasingly difficult search for food."</p>
<p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-twitter_embed">
</p><div id="88e6a" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="I8Y9JG1576662707"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="905174996758269953" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">Battle Begins to Restore Protections for Greater Yellowstone Grizzly Bears https://t.co/X8DQxHLNQ6 @greenpeaceusa @Sierra_Magazine</div> — EcoWatch (@EcoWatch)<a href="https://twitter.com/EcoWatch/statuses/905174996758269953">1504645511.0</a></blockquote></div>
<p></p>
From Your Site Articles
- Love Wildlife? Check Out These 11 Stunning Photos From ... ›
- Yellowstone Grizzlies Win Reprieve From Trophy Hunt as Court Restores Endangered Species Protections - EcoWatch ›
Related Articles Around the Web
Read More
Show Less
Trending
A grizzly bear at Montana Grizzly Encounter in Bozeman, MT, a rescue and educational sanctuary. jerseygal2009 / CC BY-ND 2.0
The Wyoming Game and Fish Commission voted unanimously Wednesday to approve the largest grizzly bear hunt in the lower 48 states, despite opposition from environmental groups, tribal nations and wildlife photographers, The Washington Post reported.
<p>The vote comes less than a month after the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/yellowstone-grizzly-bears-2564657776.html" target="_self">affirmed</a> its June 2017 decision to delist grizzly bears in the Greater Yellowstone Area (GYE) from protections under the <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/endangered-species" target="_self">Endangered Species</a> Act and pass management of the bears' population off to the states of Wyoming, Montana and Idaho. This will be the first grizzly bear hunt in Wyoming since 1974. </p><p>"Allowing a trophy hunt of these majestic animals—the second-slowest mammal to reproduce in North America—so soon after they lost Endangered Species protections does nothing to build public confidence in state management of grizzly bears," <a href="https://www.sierraclub.org" target="_blank">Sierra Club</a> representative Bonnie Rice said in a statement reported by The Washington Post. </p><p>There is still a chance the hunt will not take place. A U.S. District Court judge will decide several lawsuits challenging the delisting of the GYE bears this summer.</p><p>If the bears remain delisted, the hunt will occur this fall and will allow hunters to kill one female or 10 male bears in a "demographic monitoring area" of prime habitat and an additional 12 male or female bears in a more "human dominated landscape," for a potential kill of 22 bears. Montana decided not to allow a bear hunt in February and Idaho has permitted a hunt of one male bear, also this fall.</p><p>More than 200 tribal nations opposed the hunt, saying the bears are sacred to their culture, and want to move the bears to tribal lands. One-hundred and seven <a href="https://files.acrobat.com/a/preview/8d4727cd-fc49-4672-a784-91305626ac5a" target="_blank">wildlife photographers</a> and 75 scientists also wrote letters condemning the hunt to Wyoming's Republican Governor Matt Mead.</p><p>"To be in the presence of a bear for the first time or the hundredth, is something to be savored for a lifetime. Allowing a bear hunt will change their numbers and their demeanor, making them skittish and much harder to see. It will take away that experience from countless people and Wyoming will lose a part of the wildness that is its hallmark," filmmaker and photographer Trip Jennings said in a <a href="https://www.sierraclub.org/press-releases/2018/05/107-photographers-call-wyoming-reject-proposed-grizzly-bear-trophy-hunt" target="_blank">statement</a> about the photographers' letter.</p><p>"Yellowstone's bears are national treasures. Hunting them is like defacing the Statue of Liberty or filling in the Grand Canyon," Endangered Species Director at the <a href="http://www.biologicaldiversity.org" target="_blank">Center for Biological Diversity</a> (CBD) Noah Greenwald agreed in a <a href="http://www.biologicaldiversity.org/news/press_releases/2018/yellowstone-grizzly-bear-05-23-2018.php" target="_blank">press release</a>. "Millions of people come to see these bears every year. It's so disturbing that Wyoming thinks they're more valuable dead than alive."</p><p>According to the CBD, 125,000 people sent comments opposing the hunt.</p><p>No hunting will be allowed in <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/yellowstone-national-park" target="_blank">Yellowstone National Park</a> itself, or in the nearby Grand Teton National Park or the road between them. A bear-favored region east of Grand Teton will also be off limits to hunters.</p><p>According to The Washington Post, federal biologists say the population has recovered enough to support a hunt, a view shared by Mead.</p><p>"The question is not whether you hunt grizzly bears or not," Mead told C-SPAN, according to The Washington Post. "The question is whether grizzly bears have grown enough in terms of population and in habitat that they can be a sustainable species. And clearly they have." </p><p>However, the scientists who opposed the hunt expressed concerns that it could prevent Yellowstone grizzlies from connecting to a still-protected population in northwest Montana. Further, they said that the population, which has rebounded in GYE from 136 when it was first classified as endangered in 1975 to around 700 today, is still vulnerable due to <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/climate-change" target="_self">climate change</a>, which is threatening food sources like white bark pine.</p><p>The CBD pointed out that the bears still occupy less than four percent of their historic U.S. range.</p><p><a href="https://defenders.org" target="_blank">Defenders of Wildlife</a> also issued a statement arguing that too many grizzly bears in the GYE already die due to human activity to justify a hunt. These deaths occur when bears are killed when they get into garbage or attack livestock, are run over by cars or trains or are poached illegally. </p><p>"This hunt will add unnecessary mortality to a population already experiencing high human-related grizzly bear deaths. [The Wyoming Game and Fish Department] should instead focus on minimizing human caused mortality through proactive conflict prevention, outreach and education while allowing the Yellowstone grizzly bear population to expand into historic habitat," Rockies & Plains director at Defenders of Wildlife Jonathan Proctor said in a statement. </p>
From Your Site Articles
Related Articles Around the Web
Read More
Show Less
Yellowstone Grizzly Bears to Lose Endangered Species Protection, U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Confirms
30 April 2018
Animals
Four grizzly bear cubs near Mammoth Hot Springs, Yellowstone National Park. Pat Gaines / Flickr
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) reaffirmed its June 2017 decision to designate grizzly bears in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem (GYE) as a separate population and remove that population from protections under the Endangered Species Act, the FWS announced in the Federal Register Friday.
When the FWS announced the June 22 decision, they pointed to the fact that the population of grizzly bears in the area in and around Yellowstone National Park had grown from 136 in 1975, when the species was first listed, to 700 today.
<p style="">But <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/conservation">conservation</a> groups like the <a href="http://www.biologicaldiversity.org/species/mammals/grizzly_bear/" target="_blank">Center for Biological Diversity</a> are concerned that the decision will isolate the GYE bears genetically and render them vulnerable to human-caused mortality and the impacts of <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/climate-change" target="_self">climate change</a>. </p><p style="">In August 2017, they joined tribal and other conservation groups in suing the federal government to restore protections for the bears.</p><p style="">Friday's decision is the result of a review <a href="https://www.fws.gov/mountain-prairie/pressrel/2017/12062017_US_Fish_and_Wildlife_Service_Requests_Public_Comment_on_Potential_Impacts_of_Court_Ruling_on_Lower_48_Grizzly_Bears.php" target="_blank">launched Dec. 6</a> to assess the impact of a D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals ruling on the proposed delisting of GYE grizzly bears.</p><p style="">The court's <a href="https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/cadc/15-5041/15-5041-2017-08-01.html" target="_blank">Aug. 1 decision</a> overturned a FWS delisting of gray wolves in the Western Great Lakes area, finding that the FWS had failed to take into account how delisting one segment of the species would impact both the remaining protected gray wolf populations and the historical range of the gray wolf overall. Following this ruling, the FWS assessed the impact of delisting GYE grizzly bears on other protected bears in the lower 48 states and on the grizzlies' historical range. Friday, the FWS concluded that the June decision was sound and noted that the rest of the grizzly bear population in the lower 48 states would remain protected. </p><p style="">Andrea Santarsiere of the Center for Biological Diversity disagreed. "They still occupy less than five percent of their historical range. That's just not recovery," she told <a href="https://www.cbsnews.com/news/yellowstone-national-park-grizzly-bear-protections-will-not-be-restored-by-us-2018-04-28/?ftag=CNM-00-10aab6a&linkId=51081232" target="_blank">The Associated Press</a>. </p><p style="">Following June's decision, the three states in the GYE—Wyoming, Idaho and Montana—have proposed allowing hunts for grizzlies, the Associated Press reported. In Wyoming, hunters would be allowed to kill 10 males and two females starting this fall; in Idaho, kills would be limited to one male and no females. Neither state has made a final decision about the hunts.</p><p style="">Montana also proposed but eventually decided against a hunt, which the <a href="http://www.humanesociety.org/" target="_blank">Humane Society</a>, the Center for Biological Diversity and Bozeman resident Clint Nagel <a href="http://www.biologicaldiversity.org/news/press_releases/2016/grizzly-bear-08-12-2016.html" target="_blank">sued</a> to stop. </p><p style="">"I have two concerns over the issue of delisting of the grizzly bear: the future of the bear itself, and making sure the public understands and participates in decisions about how the bear will be managed if delisting occurs," Nagel said in a Center for Biological Diversity press release.</p>According to the <a href="https://www.fws.gov/mountain-prairie/es/grizzlyBear.php" target="_blank">FWS</a>, in the early 1800s, 50,000 grizzly bears lived between the Pacific Ocean and the Great Plains. Today, only 1,400 to 1,700 remain in five areas, including Yellowstone.<p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-twitter_embed">
</p><div id="88e6a" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="N2LUUD1576663077"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="905174996758269953" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">Battle Begins to Restore Protections for Greater Yellowstone Grizzly Bears https://t.co/X8DQxHLNQ6 @greenpeaceusa @Sierra_Magazine</div> — EcoWatch (@EcoWatch)<a href="https://twitter.com/EcoWatch/statuses/905174996758269953">1504645511.0</a></blockquote></div>
<p></p>
Read More
Show Less
Grizzly bear on Swan Lake Flats. Yellowstone National Park / Flickr
Yellowstone grizzly bears could be legally hunted for the first time in four decades under a proposal issued by Wyoming officials last week.
The move comes less than a year after the iconic bears were stripped of Endangered Species Act protections.
<p style="">Wyoming Game and Fish Department's new draft regulation would allow the killing of up to 24 grizzly bears—that's 12 bears (10 males, two females) within the demographic monitoring area in Greater Yellowstone, plus another 12 bears of any sex outside the area. </p><p style="">"This draft was shaped by public input we received this fall and winter and the best available science. It contains proposed regulations that would ensure Wyoming will meet its commitment to manage for a healthy and viable population of grizzly bears inside the demographic monitoring area in northwest Wyoming," said Brian Nesvik, the Wyoming Game and Fish Department's chief game warden and chief of the wildlife division. </p><p style="">"We believe this proposal reflects the public support for using hunting as a component of grizzly bear management and has many provisions that will recognize this opportunity and keep the grizzly bear population recovered for generations to come." </p><p style=""><a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/grizzly-bears-at-risk-of-being-hunted-for-the-first-time-in-decades-1882188341.html">More than 50,000 grizzly bears</a> resided between the Pacific Ocean and the Great Plains in the early 1800s but their numbers dwindled down to only 136 by 1975, when they were listed as "threatened" under the federal Endangered Species Act. Their federally protected status allowed the population to increase to about 700 or more today. But, citing success in conservation efforts, the <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/trump-watch/">Trump</a> administration <a href="https://www.doi.gov/pressreleases/secretary-zinke-announces-recovery-and-delisting-yellowstone-grizzly-bear" target="_blank">delisted</a> the bears in June, thus allowing states to open up hunting season on the animals. </p><p style="">Environmental groups sharply denounced the Wyoming's plan. </p><p style="">"Wyoming's reckless hunt ignores the fact that grizzly bears remain endangered in Yellowstone and across the west," said Andrea Santarsiere, a senior attorney at the <a href="http://www.biologicaldiversity.org/" target="_blank">Center for Biological Diversity</a>. "It's tragic that these imperiled animals will be shot and killed so trophy hunters can stick heads on their walls."</p><p style="">The Center for Biological Diversity <a href="http://www.biologicaldiversity.org/news/press_releases/2018/grizzly-bear-03-09-2018.php#.WqRaLZp6ZsQ.twitter" target="_blank">noted</a> that the bears occupy less than 4 percent of their historic U.S. range and are under threat from isolation from other grizzly populations, loss of key food sources in the Yellowstone ecosystem and human-caused mortalities, which may soon include hunting if Wyoming's proposal is approved. </p><p style="">Santarsiere said Montana "made the right decision" not to hold a hunt in 2018 after grizzlies were delisted, but "Wyoming's failure to follow suit is deeply disappointing."</p><p style="">Bonnie Rice of the <a href="http://sierraclub.org" target="_blank">Sierra Club</a>'s Greater Yellowstone campaign <a href="https://www.sierraclub.org/press-releases/2018/03/sierra-club-denounces-wyoming-grizzly-bear-hunting-proposal-yellowstone" target="_blank">added</a>, "Wyoming should focus on continued recovery of grizzly bears, preventing conflicts and promoting coexistence and safety for bears and people. This misguided proposal will set back forty years of grizzly recovery efforts." </p><p>"Grizzly bears are one of the slowest animals to reproduce; it takes a female grizzly ten years to replace herself in the population," Rice said. "It's a pipe dream to believe that hunters are going to be able to distinguish between male and female grizzly bears. We will undoubtedly lose more female grizzlies in a hunt—even more than authorized under this proposal." </p><p style="">The new draft regulation is available for review online and a public comment period is <a href="https://wgfd.wyo.gov/News/Public-comment-period-starts-for-draft-grizzly-bea" target="_blank">now underway</a>. </p><p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-twitter_embed">
</p><div id="34f02" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="DO8FJD1576683841"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="904815121037479936" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">Battle Begins to Restore Protections for Greater Yellowstone Grizzly Bears https://t.co/8pJbiVOBZl @NatGeo @WWF @environmentca</div> — EcoWatch (@EcoWatch)<a href="https://twitter.com/EcoWatch/statuses/904815121037479936">1504559710.0</a></blockquote></div>
<p></p>
From Your Site Articles
Related Articles Around the Web
Read More
Show Less
Circle M Outfitters
British Columbia's provincial government Monday announced a decision to prohibit grizzly bear hunting province-wide.
<p style="">In stark contrast to the province's decision to protect its estimated 15,000 grizzly bears, the Trump administration in June removed <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/endangered-species">endangered species</a> protections for the roughly 700 bears <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/grizzly-bears-yellowstone-2446382005.html">found in the </a><a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/grizzly-bears-yellowstone-2446382005.html">Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem</a>.</p><p style="">Following the removal of federal protections, Idaho, Montana and Wyoming are now readying for their first <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/bc-grizzy-bear-trophy-hunt-2379533302.html">grizzly bear trophy hunts</a> since the animals were first listed under the <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/senate-bill-intrastate-species-2490613995.html">Endangered Species Act</a> in 1975. </p><p style="">"We're ecstatic British Columbia has banned cruel trophy hunts for these magnificent animals," said Andrea Santarsiere, a senior attorney with the <a href="http://www.biologicaldiversity.org/" target="_blank">Center for Biological Diversity</a>. "This wise decision highlights the cruel absurdity of the Trump administration's decision to strip protections from imperiled Yellowstone grizzlies. We'll keep fighting to prevent the horrific and wasteful practice of hunting grizzly bears in the U.S."</p><p style="">The Center for Biological Diversity and allies are <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/florida-forest-walmart-2516626710.html">challenging removal of</a> endangered species protections in court in an effort to stop these hunts and obtain broader recovery for grizzly bears.</p>
From Your Site Articles
- The Planet's Most Dangerous Predator Is Us ›
- Yellowstone Grizzlies Win Reprieve From Trophy Hunt as Court Restores Endangered Species Protections - EcoWatch ›
Related Articles Around the Web
Read More
Show Less
Trending
Battle Begins to Restore Protections for Greater Yellowstone Grizzly Bears
04 September 2017
Popular
iStock
By WildEarth Guardian
Wednesday, WildEarth Guardians sued the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, challenging the agency's flawed rule stripping grizzly bears in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem of Endangered Species Act protections. The service's premature removal of crucial federal safeguards undermines the recovery of the species as a whole, while subjecting grizzlies stepping outside the safety of our national parks to state-sanctioned trophy hunting.
"The Service failed to carry out its paramount—and mandatory—duty to ensure grizzly bears in the contiguous United States are recovered to the point at which the protections of the Endangered Species Act are no longer necessary," said Kelly Nokes, carnivore advocate for WildEarth Guardians. "The Service's decision is riddled with flaws, not based in science nor the law, and places this icon of all that is wild squarely in the crosshairs of extinction once again."
<p style="">The lawsuit faults the service for illegally designating grizzlies in Greater Yellowstone as a "distinct population segment" and simultaneously removing protections from the population without first considering the impact such removal will have on imperiled grizzly populations located elsewhere in the lower 48 states. The suit also highlights the service's failure to use the best available science when it determined that grizzlies in the Yellowstone region are recovered.</p><p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-twitter_embed"></p><div id="2a36e" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="K8BUI31504534244"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="878359553489764352" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">Yellowstone Grizzly Bears to Lose Endangered Species Protection https://t.co/XjADo2xnmi @environmentca @ConservationOrg</div> — EcoWatch (@EcoWatch)<a href="https://twitter.com/EcoWatch/statuses/878359553489764352">1498252211.0</a></blockquote></div><p></p><p style="">"Biologists agree that grizzly recovery hinges on connecting isolated populations and distributing the genes they carry," said Matthew Bishop, an attorney with the <a href="https://westernlaw.org/" target="_blank">Western Environmental Law Center</a> representing WildEarth Guardians. "Under this illegal and ill-advised plan, dispersing grizzlies essential to species recovery would be the first to die."<br></p><p style="">Grizzlies in the Yellowstone region remain threatened by dwindling food sources, habitat loss and fragmentation, and illegal killing. The Yellowstone population is isolated and has yet to connect to bears elsewhere in the U.S., including to bears in and around Glacier National Park. Grizzlies also have yet to reclaim key historic habitats, including the Bitterroot Range along the Montana-Idaho border.</p><p style="">Hunted, trapped and poisoned to near extinction, grizzly bear populations in the contiguous U.S. declined drastically from nearly 50,000 bears to only a few hundred by the 1930s. In response to the decline, the service designated the species as threatened under the Endangered Species Act in 1975, a move that likely saved them from extinction. The species has since struggled to hang on, with only roughly 1,800 currently surviving in the lower 48 states. Grizzlies remain absent from nearly 98 percent of their historic range.</p><p style="">At last count, approximately 690 grizzly bears resided in the Greater Yellowstone region in 2016, down from 2015's count of 717 bears. The last two years had near record-breaking grizzly mortality, with at least 139 bears killed since 2015 (including 20 documented deaths thus far in 2017, 58 dead bears in 2016 and 61 dead grizzlies in 2015). Of those, at least 98 bears died due to human-causes and 30 deaths remain undetermined or are still under investigation.</p><p style="">Wednesday's lawsuit challenges the service's final rule removing Endangered Species Act protections from grizzly bears in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem in U.S. District Court for the District of Montana. WildEarth Guardians is represented by Matthew Bishop and John Mellgren of the Western Environmental Law Center and Kelly Nokes of WildEarth Guardians.</p>
Read More
Show Less
www.youtube.com
Thanks to Newsy for their coverage on Thursday's news that the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service removed grizzly bears in the Greater Yellowstone region from the Endangered Species List.
Watch above as Newsy explains that the decision comes despite serious concerns from the environmental and scientific community, and Tribal Nations about a declining, isolated grizzly bear population with diminishing food resources and record-high mortalities.
<p><a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/grizzly-bears-yellowstone-2446382005.html">According to</a> Sierra Club's Executive Director Michael Brune, "The <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/trump-watch/" target="_self">Trump administration</a> turned a deaf ear to repeated calls for consultation from dozens of Tribal Nations. States have already made it clear that without <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/endangered-species" target="_self">endangered species</a> protections, immediate steps will be taken to reduce the number of bears in the area, including through <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/trophy-hunting">trophy hunting</a>—a move that will reverse grizzly bear recovery in the region."</p><p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-twitter_embed"></p><div id="c748d" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="X10S2J1524750064"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="877994500689461249" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">#Yellowstone Grizzly #Bears to Lose Endangered Species Protection https://t.co/keDm4lrS2M @SierraClub @bruneski @maryannehitt @endangered</div> — EcoWatch (@EcoWatch)<a href="https://twitter.com/EcoWatch/statuses/877994500689461249">1498165175.0</a></blockquote></div><p></p>
Read More
Show Less
Trending
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service removed grizzly bears in the Greater Yellowstone region on Thursday from the Endangered Species List. The decision comes despite serious concerns in the scientific community about a declining, isolated population with diminishing food resources and record-high mortalities, as well as strong opposition from an unprecedented number of Tribal Nations.
<p>The <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/trump-watch/">Trump administration</a> turned a deaf ear to repeated calls for consultation from dozens of Tribal Nations. States have already made it clear that without <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/endangered-species">endangered species</a> protections, immediate steps will be taken to reduce the number of bears in the area, including through trophy hunting—a move that will reverse grizzly bear recovery in the region.</p><p><span></span>This premature decision to remove endangered species protections could set grizzly recovery back by decades. It is an egregious affront to Tribal Nations that consider grizzly bears sacred, and it's bad news for the Yellowstone region's outdoor economy.</p><p>Without necessary Endangered Species protections, the survival of grizzly bears in Greater Yellowstone is put in jeopardy. Inadequate requirements for healthy bear populations, combined with hostile state management practices, threaten to reverse the progress made toward bear recovery. The end result will be fewer bears restricted to an even smaller area. Grizzly bears will be killed through trophy hunts on the doorstep of Yellowstone and Grand Teton National Parks instead of inspiring millions who come to the region just for a chance to see a live grizzly bear in the wild.</p><p>People and bears can coexist—and as grizzly recovery so far has demonstrated, can do so in a way that is highly beneficial to all. However, coexistence cannot work if misplaced political hostility continues to impede the ability of sound science to keep bears from sliding back towards extinction.</p>
Read More
Show Less
Grizzly bears venturing from dens in search of food this spring will face landscapes dominated by mines, roads, pipelines, clearcuts and ever-expanding towns and cities. As in years past, they'll also face the possibility of painful death at the hands of trophy hunters.
<p>British Columbia's spring bear hunt just opened. Hunters are fanning across the province's mountains, grasslands, forests and coastline, armed with high-powered rifles and the desire to bag a grizzly bear, just to put its head on a wall or its pelt on the floor as a "trophy."</p><p>According to BC government statistics, they will kill about 300 of these majestic animals by the end of the spring and fall hunts. If this year follows previous patterns, about 30 percent of the slaughter will be females—the reproductive engines of grizzly populations.</p><p>Many grizzlies will likely be killed within BC's renowned provincial parks and protected areas, where trophy hunting is legal. Government records obtained by the <a href="http://www.davidsuzuki.org/" target="_blank">David Suzuki Foundation</a> in 2008 show trophy hunters have shot dozens of grizzly bears in places we would expect <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/wildlife">wildlife</a> to be protected. We don't know the exact number of bears killed in BC's parks since 2008 because, in contravention of a BC's privacy commissioner's ruling, the government refuses to disclose recent spatial data showing where bears have been killed.</p><p>Much of this killing has occurred in northern wilderness parks, such as Height of the Rockies Provincial Park, Spatsizi Plateau Wilderness Park and Tatshenshini-Alsek Wilderness Park. Tatshenshini-Alsek Park forms a massive transboundary conservation zone with federal protected areas in the Yukon (Kluane National Park and Reserve) and Alaska (Glacier Bay National Park and Preserve and Wrangell-St. Elias National Park and Preserve). Trophy hunting is prohibited in most U.S. national parks and all Canadian national parks, but not in BC's provincial parks.</p><p>Wild animals don't heed political boundaries. Wide-ranging species like grizzly bears move in and out of neighboring jurisdictions. If a grizzly bear in Montana wanders a few kilometers north in search of a mate, it goes from being protected by the U.S. Endangered Species Act to being a possible trophy hunter target in BC.</p><p>But now, in response to intense pressure from the trophy hunting industry, the U.S. administration wants to <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/grizzly-bears-at-risk-of-being-hunted-for-the-first-time-in-decades-1882188341.html">strip grizzly bears of federal protection</a>. President Trump also recently signed into law rules allowing trophy hunters to target grizzly bears around bait stations and from aircraft and to kill grizzly mothers and their cubs in Alaska's national wildlife refuges, where they've been protected from these unethical hunting practices.</p><p>Grizzly bears face an ominous political climate under the <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/trump-watch/">Trump administration</a>, along with growing human threats across their North American range, from trophy hunting to habitat destruction, precipitous declines in food sources like salmon and whitebark pine nuts and <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/climate-change/">climate change</a> impacts.</p><p>In parts of Canada, mainly in sparsely populated areas of northern BC and the territories, grizzly bear numbers are stable. But in the Interior and southern BC and Alberta, grizzlies have been relegated to a ragged patchwork of small, isolated and highly threatened habitats—a vestige of the forests and grasslands they once dominated. The BC government has ended grizzly hunting among highly threatened sub-populations in the Interior and southern parts of the province and, in response to pressure from local First Nations, has promised to do the same in the Great Bear Rainforest. But the slaughter of BC's great bears continues everywhere else.</p><p>That this year's spring hunt coincides with a BC election could bring hope for grizzlies, possibly catalyzing the first change in government wildlife policy in close to two decades. The May 9 election will give BC residents the opportunity to ask candidates if they will end the grizzly hunt if elected. So far, the BC New Democratic Party and Green Party say they would ban grizzly trophy hunting (but allow grizzly hunting for food), whereas the BC Liberals continue to defend and promote the trophy hunt as "well-managed," despite scientific evidence to the contrary.</p><p>The fate of BC's grizzlies is too important to be a partisan issue. All politicians should support protection. Rough-and-tumble politics this election season might finally end BC's cruel and unsustainable grizzly bear trophy hunt. It's time to stop this grisly business.</p>
Read More
Show Less
50 Native Tribes Join Fight to Prevent Delisting of Yellowstone Grizzly Bears
30 September 2016
Popular
Tribal leaders from the U.S. and Canada signed a joint treaty today opposing the proposed delisting of Yellowstone grizzly bears by the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service (USFWS). More than 50 federally recognized tribes, backed by the 900,000-member Assembly of First Nations, support the treaty.
<p>The USFWS has been working to remove the Yellowstone grizzly bear from the threatened species list under the Endangered Species Act since 2005. <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/david-suzuki-trophy-hunting-1999211166.html">Trophy hunters</a> have been waiting for the opportunity to put a grizzly head on their walls ever since.</p><p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-twitter_embed"></p><div id="ff5ef" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="SO386M1494858125"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="708780917163233284" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">Grizzly Bears at Risk of Being Hunted for the First Time in Decades https://t.co/1XYPyaYEri @ConservationOrg @environmentca</div> — EcoWatch (@EcoWatch)<a href="https://twitter.com/EcoWatch/statuses/708780917163233284">1457821513.0</a></blockquote></div><p></p><p>In 2007, the Greater Yellowstone grizzly bear population was delisted, but a court challenge was upheld and it was returned to the <a href="http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/mt/home/?cid=nrcs144p2_057920" target="_blank">threatened species list</a> in 2009. The bears survived another court challenge when the USFWS appealed the decision to overturn the delisting, but an appellate court <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/court-upholds-endangered-status-for-grizzlies-1881557993.html">ruled</a> in <a href="https://www.nps.gov/yell/learn/nature/bearesa.htm" target="_blank">favor of the bears</a> in 2011. Now, the USFWS is back for another try.<br></p><p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-rebelmouse-image"><img type="lazy-image" data-runner-src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy84MTM5MDM3L29yaWdpbi5qcGciLCJleHBpcmVzX2F0IjoxNjU5NjE3MzMwfQ.oho1HP7R5TZI9JzBRvOFHoj1HQMNdM7m31xs1hN3KFA/img.jpg?width=980" id="69274" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="122cd213a8623726d27bb5831133be3e" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image"><small placeholder="add caption..." class="image-media media-caption">Chief Stanley Grier of the Piikani Nation.</small><small placeholder="add photo credit..." class="image-media media-photo-credit">Native News Online.net</small></p><p>"The grizzly bear has been significant to the Blackfoot people since the time of our Creation," <a href="http://nativenewsonline.net/currents/blackfoot-confederacy-leaders-call-us-government-grizzly-delisting-an-act-of-cultural-genocide/" target="_blank">said</a> Chief Stanley Grier of the Piikani Nation, where one of several treaty ceremonies will take place today. <span></span><br></p><p>"It is cultural genocide. I wouldn't put it any other way," <a href="http://nativenewsonline.net/currents/blackfoot-confederacy-leaders-call-us-government-grizzly-delisting-an-act-of-cultural-genocide/" target="_blank">said</a> Blackfeet councilwoman Cheryl Little Dog. "To delist and allow trophy hunting of the grizzly bear is the government again saying to our people, 'Forget how sacred the grizzly bear is. Forget your sacred ways.'"</p><p>Grizzly bears once roamed the American West from California—where it is on the state flag—to the Great Plains and south to Mexico. By 1975, when the grizzly was added to the threatened species list, it was down to just two percent of its traditional range, and just 136 bears were left in the the <a href="https://www.nps.gov/yell/learn/nature/ecosystem.htm" target="_blank">Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem</a>—which includes Yellowstone, Grand Teton and John D. Rockefeller national parks, along with national forests, the National Elk Refuge and some state and private lands in Montana, Idaho and Wyoming.<br></p><p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-rebelmouse-image"><img type="lazy-image" data-runner-src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy84MTM5MDgwL29yaWdpbi5qcGciLCJleHBpcmVzX2F0IjoxNjYyODM0OTc0fQ.B3n4GNhfMh5asklX__xkTTYw8BVDE9ktU3VR6Z-Ghrg/img.jpg?width=980" id="ea1b0" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="a47bce73a08baebda6f38882e6734433" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image"><small placeholder="add caption..." class="image-media media-caption">Map of the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem.</small><small placeholder="add photo credit..." class="image-media media-photo-credit">National Park Service / Yellowstone Spatial Analysis Center</small></p><p>Today, there are about 150 grizzly bears with home ranges in <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/love-wildlife-check-out-these-11-stunning-photos-from-yellowstone-nati-1882192140.html">Yellowstone National Park</a>, and between 674 and 839 in the 34,375-square-mile Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem. The USFWS contends that this equates to recovery of the bears to a sustainable population. Conservationist Jane Goodall and 57 other scientists and experts <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/jane-goodall-among-58-scientists-urging-government-to-halt-grizzly-de--1891128685.html">disagree</a>. </p><p>In May, they <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/jane-goodall-among-58-scientists-urging-government-to-halt-grizzly-de--1891128685.html">called on</a> the USFWS to keep the bears protected. In July, a <a href="http://www.defendersblog.org/2016/07/future-yellowstone-grizzly-bears/" target="_blank">post</a> on the Defenders of Wildlife blog noted:</p><p style="margin-left: 20px;">"These grizzlies are also still isolated. Years of protection and conservation work have created a relatively safe landscape for the bears in this region, but not necessarily beyond it. With dangerous roads and human development criss-crossing a patchwork of habitats, it will be a difficult journey for Yellowstone grizzlies to safely travel to other grizzly bear populations or for bears from other populations to get to the Yellowstone ecosystem – something Yellowstone bears need to help the species remain healthy and resilient to change."</p><p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-twitter_embed"></p><div id="ce8a2" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="UAH7TR1494858125"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="728622873536020482" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">Jane Goodall Among 58 Scientists Urging Government to Halt #Grizzly De-Listing https://t.co/MPT5m6cWVG @NWF @NRDC https://t.co/Gk8UXkkjqf</div> — EcoWatch (@EcoWatch)<a href="https://twitter.com/EcoWatch/statuses/728622873536020482">1462552204.0</a></blockquote></div><p></p><p>Should the grizzly bear lose its protected states, Montana residents will soon be able to fork over just $150 for a permit to shoot and kill a grizzly during two proposed hunting seasons, in late fall and early spring. Last year, a bear popular with wildlife watchers and photographers who earned the nickname Scarface was <a href="http://indiancountrytodaymedianetwork.com//2016/05/06/scarface-famous-yellowstone-grizzly-shot-dead-twilight-years-164401" target="_blank">shot illegally</a> near Gardiner, Montana, outside the north entrance to Yellowstone National Park. <br></p><p>In August, the <a href="http://www.humanesociety.org/" target="_blank">Humane Society of the United States</a>, the <a href="http://www.biologicaldiversity.org/" target="_blank">Center for Biological Diversity</a> and Bozeman resident Clint Nagel filed suit against the Montana Fish and Wildlife Commission over adoption of its trophy hunting plan.</p><p>"By specifically targeting the biggest and strongest males, trophy hunting reduces the genetic viability of a species and has cascading impacts on the social dynamics of apex predators, including increasing infanticide," <a href="http://www.thewildlifenews.com/2016/08/22/montanas-regulations-for-hunting-grizzly-bears-is-challenged-as-illegal/" target="_blank">wrote</a> The Wildlife News.<br></p><p>Todd Wilkinson, author of <em>Grizzlies of Pilgrim Creek</em>, <a href="http://news.nationalgeographic.com/2016/03/160304-grizzlies-bears-animals-science-endangered-species0/" target="_blank">writing</a> for National Geographic, stated, "Grizzlies' rarity has made them valuable assets, economically worth far more alive than as a person's rug or trophy."<span></span></p><p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-rebelmouse-image"><img type="lazy-image" data-runner-src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy84MTM5MTE1L29yaWdpbi5qcGciLCJleHBpcmVzX2F0IjoxNjI3ODQ1MjY0fQ.hI_lW2tJgpaurftPh1xWBNCsrdZYe_vIuI87ZKzQxP8/img.jpg?width=980" id="0fdbb" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="2cd4571cf59eed7cfb886ec3ea44450c" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image"><small placeholder="add caption..." class="image-media media-caption">Today, there are about 150 grizzly bears with home ranges in Yellowstone National Park, and between 674 and 839 in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem.</small><small placeholder="add photo credit..." class="image-media media-photo-credit">National Park Service</small></p><p>But the debates over hunting and the scientific merits of delisting leave out the interests of Native peoples, and as we've learned from <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/arrests-dakota-access-pipeline-2022534609.html">Standing Rock</a>, they are not about to give up the fight for their lands and a healthy environment. In the statement March 3, <a href="https://www.fws.gov/mountain-prairie/pressrel/2016/03032016_US_Fish_and_Wildlife_Service_Proposes_Delisting_Yellowstone_Grizzly_Bear_Due_To_Recovery.php" target="_blank">statement</a> from USFWS announcing the proposed delisting, service director Dan Ashe said, "We are look forward to hearing from the public about the proposal and consulting with Native American tribes." <span></span></p><p>Tribal leaders have denounced the consultation process. </p><p>"Our formal request for consultation has been ignored," <a href="http://nativenewsonline.net/currents/feds-dismiss-tribes-rights-on-grizzly-publish-proposed-rule-to-allow-trophy-hunting-of-bear/" target="_blank">wrote</a> Hopi Chairman Herman Honanie in a letter to Interior Secretary Sally Jewell. </p><p>Native leaders also question USFWS' choice of consultancy <a href="http://www.amecfw.com" target="_blank">Amec Foster Wheeler</a><a href="http://www.amecfw.com"></a> to conduct the <a href="https://www.fws.gov/mountain-prairie/es/07142016_GrizzlyBearPeerReview.pdf" target="_blank">peer review</a> process for the delisting of the Greater Yellowstone grizzly bears. The company says that it serves "the oil & gas, clean energy, environment & infrastructure and mining markets" and lists projects including oil and gas pipeline development. </p><p>In a letter from the <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/native-american-land-grab-2010250967.html">Navajo Nation</a> to Secretary Jewell, president Russell Begaye and vice president Jonathan Nez<span></span> <a href="http://nativenewsonline.net/currents/navajo-nation-calls-feds-grizzly-delisting-claims-reinforces-link-dakota-access/" target="_blank">wrote</a>, "It is very troubling to see the influence of corporate energy companies on this delisting decision." </p><p>"Tribes have endured two centuries of deception and deceit when dealing with the U.S. government, and this rule that will provide rich wasicu [non-Indians] with the legal authority to trophy hunt our sacred relative, the grizzly bear, is a continuation of that pattern," <a href="http://www.indianz.com/News/2016/020683.asp" target="_blank">said</a> Tom Poor Bear, vice president of the <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/dakota-access-pipeline-dog-attack-1998191259.html">Oglala Sioux Tribe</a>, earlier this year. </p><p>The <a href="http://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/nation-world/national/article104649801.html" target="_blank">treaty</a> signed today makes a statement about the core interests of Native American and Native Canadian peoples in the survival of the grizzly bear.</p><p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-twitter_embed"></p><div id="a0699" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="YEXFOI1494858125"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="778284149421596673" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">Federal Bill Seeks First Native American Land Grab in 100 Years https://t.co/qvNtJMjxDJ @Frack_Off @FrackAction @VanJones68 @shailenewoodley</div> — EcoWatch (@EcoWatch)<a href="https://twitter.com/EcoWatch/statuses/778284149421596673">1474392375.0</a></blockquote></div><p></p>
Read More
Show Less