Countryside near Emigrant, Montana near where a Canadian company wanted to mine for gold. SoCalChris / CC BY-SA 3.0
A Canadian company cannot carry out exploratory drilling for gold mining on land just north of Yellowstone National Park, a Montana district court ruled Monday.
<p>Protecting the <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/public-lands" target="_self">public lands</a> around Yellowstone has been a bipartisan effort, as <a href="https://earthjustice.org/" target="_blank">Earthjustice</a>, which argued the case against the Canadian company, pointed out in a <a href="https://earthjustice.org/news/press/2019/court-affirms-yellowstone-more-valuable-than-gold-blocks-mining-exploration?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social&fbclid=IwAR0yLkgMSK_KkX5Ir5YBNSMQAKWhZWxRTvnSGp5NRWUuJcBN4EwldBP6lvU" target="_blank">press release</a>. Former Interior Sec. Ryan Zinke banned mining on public lands near Yellowstone for 20 years in October 2018, and this was made permanent in March when President <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/donald-trump" target="_self">Donald Trump</a> signed a massive, bi-partisan <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/public-lands-bill-2630182126.html" target="_blank">public lands bill</a>. But Lucky Minerals Inc. had sought permission to mine on private land in Emigrant Gulch. </p>
<p>"The court's ruling is a critical piece in protecting Yellowstone's Gateway from the menace of gold mining," <a href="http://greateryellowstone.org/" target="_blank">Greater Yellowstone Coalition</a> (GYC) Executive Director Caroline Byrd said in the press release. "The Trump administration, the Obama administration, Congress, the Forest Service, the Park County Commission, thousands of citizens and more than 420 Montana businesses all agree, Yellowstone is more valuable than gold."</p>
<div id="d6bee" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="4EJJYH1576664239"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="1118277045681827841" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">VICTORY! 🎉🎉🎉 Yesterday, a Montana court denied Lucky Minerals' permit to explore for gold in Emigrant Gulch near Ye… https://t.co/Gvcky8L0Gg</div> — Greater Yellowstone Coalition (@Greater Yellowstone Coalition)<a href="https://twitter.com/GYCnews/statuses/1118277045681827841">1555452998.0</a></blockquote></div><p><br>The Greater Yellowstone Coalition joined with the <a href="https://envirocouncil.org/" target="_blank">Park County Environmental Council</a> to challenge Lucky Minerals. Park County District Judge Brenda Gilbert ruled in their favor, invalidating the Montana Department of Environmental Quality's (DEQ) permit for the project, <a href="https://eu.greatfallstribune.com/story/news/2019/04/16/montana-court-blocks-drilling-north-yellowstone/3491167002/" target="_blank">The Associated Press reported</a>.<br></p><p>Gilbert had already ruled in May 2018 that the DEQ permit did not consider the drilling's impact on water quality and <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/wildlife" target="_self">wildlife</a>, according to <a href="http://greateryellowstone.org/blog/gycwins-challenge#utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=courtchallengewin_041619" target="_blank">GYC</a> and Earthjustice. However, a provision of the Montana Environmental Policy Act prohibits judges from blocking projects because of inadequate environmental analyses, The Associated Press reported.</p><p>Because of that provision, Lucky Minerals would have been allowed to begin exploratory drilling in July, before the new DEQ analysis was completed, Earthjustice explained. So the groups challenged the loophole, saying it violated the state's constitution. On Monday, the court agreed, arguing it gave the public "no meaningful chance to participate in the agency decision," Earthjustice reported.</p><p>"This ruling ensures that Lucky Minerals can't harm clean water and native wildlife at the gateway into Yellowstone National Park under cover of a license that was never legally issued in the first place," Earthjustice attorney Jenny Harbine said. "Lucky Minerals should have read the writing on the wall a long time ago."</p><p>Lucky Minerals CEO John Mears told The Associated Press that the company would likely appeal. However, GYC noted that in the meantime the company no longer has a permit to drill.</p><p>"Lucky Minerals should have learned by now that our community will not rest until our irreplaceable wild places are safe from industrial gold mining," Park County Environmental Council Executive Director Michelle Uberuaga said in a press release. "We will win because local residents, businesses, and elected officials are united to protect our natural resources and local economy against this threat."</p><p>GYC is also fighting the Crevice Mining Group, which has been granted permission by DEQ to mine up to 5 acres at a time on private land on Yellowstone's border without having to submit to an environmental analysis.</p>
<p class=""><em>Correction: A previous headline stated the court blocked gold mining in Yellowstone National Park. </em></p>Related Articles Around the Web
Read More
Show Less
926F wolf with a glance. Mark Perry / Getty Images
A cherished Lamar Valley wolf known as 926F was shot dead after a legal hunt just five miles outside the sanctuary of Yellowstone National Park, prompting calls from advocacy groups for greater protection of the region's wolves.
Tragically, the 7-year-old female was the daughter of Wolf 06—"the most famous wolf in the world"—who was killed the same way back in December 2012.
<p>
"We are heartbroken to share the news that the wolf killed outside the park was 926F of the Lamar Canyon Pack,"
<a href="https://www.wolvesoftherockies.org/" target="_blank">Wolves of the Rockies</a> wrote Wednesday on <a href="https://www.facebook.com/WolvesoftheRockies/photos/a.612779025444618/1976435872412253/?type=3&theater" target="_blank">Facebook</a>.</p>
<div class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="156c2e3e1ee347e838a44b8f74653eae"><div class="fb-post" data-href="https://www.facebook.com/WolvesoftheRockies/photos/a.612779025444618/1977923608930146/?type=3&theater"></div></div>
<p>The canine was frequently photographed and highly recognizable for a notch in the right ear and a graying face, according to
<a href="https://www.yellowstonewolf.org/yellowstone_wolf.php?wolf_id=47" target="_blank">Yellowstone Wolf: Project Citizen Science</a>.<br></p><p>
<span></span>Montana wildlife officials confirmed to the <a href="https://www.jhnewsandguide.com/news/environmental/article_5230de7e-9f61-54c5-b78d-add5c4ef9638.html" target="_blank">Jackson Hole Daily</a> that the kill on Saturday was state-sanctioned, as it was outside Yellowstone's boundaries.
</p><p>
"It was a legal harvest, and everything was legitimate about the way the wolf was taken," Abby Nelson, a wolf management specialist for Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks, told the publication. "The circumstances are obviously a little bit harder for people to stomach, because that pack had showed signs of habituation."
</p><p>
As detailed by
<a href="https://buckrail.com/prominent-yellowstone-wolf-killed-by-hunter/" target="_blank">Buckrail</a>, 926F's lineage can be tracked back five generations to Yellowstone's original transplanted wolves from Alberta, Canada. Gray wolves had been hunted eradication by the end of the 1920s. Many decades later, biologists reintroduced the first eight wolves to the park in January 1995, including 926F's great, great grandparents alphas 9F and 10M.
</p><p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-youtube">
<span style="display:block;position:relative;padding-top:56.25%;" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="d5649e169a972d9c1bfb3bb942564cba"><iframe type="lazy-iframe" data-runner-src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/IIHUlecEkKw?rel=0" width="100%" height="auto" frameborder="0" scrolling="no" style="position:absolute;top:0;left:0;width:100%;height:100%;"></iframe></span>
<small class="image-media media-caption" placeholder="add caption...">Yellowstone Lamar Canyon Pack 926F and Small Dot</small>
<small class="image-media media-photo-credit" placeholder="add photo credit...">
<a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IIHUlecEkKw" target="_blank">www.youtube.com</a>
</small>
</p><p>
In a
<a href="https://nywolf.org/yellowstone-wolf-926f-killed-for-trophy/" target="_blank">press release</a> about the incident, the <a href="https://nywolf.org/yellowstone-wolf-926f-killed-for-trophy/" target="_blank">Wolf Conservation Center</a> stressed that keystone predators such as wolves are important for a balanced and resilient ecosystem.
</p><p>
The wolves also bring an estimated $35 million in annual tourist revenue to the region, according to University of Montana researchers. Meanwhile, Montana
<a href="http://fwp.mt.gov/hunting/planahunt/huntingGuides/wolf/default.html" target="_blank">wolf hunting licenses</a> cost $19 for residents and $50 for nonresidents.
</p><p>
"Perhaps Montana should take a closer look at the economics of wolf hunting. Seems that Yellowstone wolves are worth a lot more alive than dead," the conservation group noted.
</p><p>
<span></span>Fans of 926F, also known as Spitfire, mourned the loss.
</p><p>
"We have all seen the outpouring of grief, rage and anger after the senseless killing of Wolf 926, which unfortunately was a legal kill," Wolves of the Rockies wrote in a <a href="https://www.facebook.com/WolvesoftheRockies/photos/a.612779025444618/1977923608930146/?type=3" target="_blank">Facebook post</a> on Thursday. "It is now time to put that grief, rage and anger to work."
</p><p>
The group suggested contacting elected officials and attending meetings at Montana, Fish Wildlife and Parks to advocate for the animals.
</p><p>
"Let them know who you are and why wolves are important to you," the post states. "Remind them a balanced eco system is in the best interest of everyone."
</p><div class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="8187da389292521470d589c9c7d9280c"><div class="fb-post" data-href="https://www.facebook.com/WolvesoftheRockies/photos/a.612779025444618/1977923608930146/"></div></div>
From Your Site Articles
- Wolves Are Losing Ground to Industrial Logging in Southeast Alaska ›
- Our New Favorite Judge May Have Saved Red Wolves From ... ›
Related Articles Around the Web
Read More
Show Less
EcoWatch Daily Newsletter
Pexels
Interior Sec. Ryan Zinke extended an existing mining ban in mountains north of Yellowstone National Park on Monday.
The move withdraws more than 30,000 acres of public lands in Montana's Paradise Valley from new claims for gold, silver and other mineral extraction for 20 years. It does not impact existing mining claims on private lands in the area.
<p>
"I fully support multiple use of public lands, but multiple use is about balance and knowing that not all areas are right for all uses," Zinke said in a statement posted by
<a href="https://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/410414-zinke-extends-mining-ban-near-yellowstone" target="_blank">The Hill</a>. "There are places where it is appropriate to mine and places where it is not. Paradise Valley is one of the areas it's not."
</p><p>
<span></span>The announcement is a noted departure for Zinke and the <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/trump">Trump</a> administration, which has <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/bears-ears-monument-controversy-2530487057.html">significantly downsized</a> and opened up <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/public-lands-fracking-2516878619.html">staggering chunks</a> of federal land across the country to oil, gas and other extractive industries.
</p><p>
Zinke has
<a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/yellowstone-mining-ban-2556261001.html">previously voiced</a> support for the Yellowstone mining ban, which protects land in his home state of Montana.<span></span>
</p><p>
"I've been fighting to protect the Paradise Valley and Yellowstone since I represented Montana in Congress," he said in March.
</p><p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-twitter_embed">
</p><div id="abf02" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="UCHG6T1576683793"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="1049344783607459840" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">What a great day for the Paradise Valley. Today I signed a 20 year mineral withdrawal to protect Emigrant Peak and… https://t.co/p6ZKWs5NBy</div> — Secretary Ryan Zinke (@Secretary Ryan Zinke)<a href="https://twitter.com/SecretaryZinke/statuses/1049344783607459840">1539018266.0</a></blockquote></div>
<p></p><p>
This is
<a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/zinke-national-monuments-2512981757.html">not the first time</a> Zinke has appeared to treat his home state differently. Last year, in his <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/zinke-national-monuments-2486752670.html" target="_self">review of national monuments</a>, he suggested creating three new monuments, including the Badger-Two Medicine area next to the Blackfeet Nation reservation by Glacier National Park in Montana. Also in March, the Bureau of Land Management—which the Interior department oversees—<a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/zinke-suddenly-pulls-land-in-home-state-of-montana-from-oil-and-gas-lease-sale/2018/03/05/c5e80664-20c3-11e8-badd-7c9f29a55815_story.html?utm_term=.9602e3a1fa66" target="_blank">removed</a> 17,300 acres of Montana from oil and gas leases.
</p><p>
"I've always said there are places where it is appropriate to develop and where it's not. This area certainly deserves more study, and appropriately we have decided to defer the sale," Zinke
<a href="https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-interior-oil/u-s-interior-chief-holds-off-on-federal-oil-lease-sale-after-outcry-idUSKBN1GH36R" target="_blank">said</a> in a statement after pulling the sale.
</p><p>
<span></span>Aaron Weiss, the media director for the
<a href="http://westernpriorities.org/2018/10/08/response-to-interior-secretary-ryan-zinkes-yellowstone-mining-ban-announcement/" target="_blank">Center for Western Priorities</a>, released the following <a href="http://westernpriorities.org/2018/10/08/response-to-interior-secretary-ryan-zinkes-yellowstone-mining-ban-announcement/" target="_blank">statement</a> today:
</p><blockquote>
"Secretary Zinke always seems to support conservation in his home state of Montana, while backing the most aggressive forms of industrial development in the other 49 states. While Zinke rushes to open up places like Bears Ears, Grand Staircase-Escalante, and the Boundary Waters to copper, uranium, and coal mining, only Montana's natural treasures get the protection they deserve. It's now clear Ryan Zinke will only do the right thing when his political future is on the line."
</blockquote><p>
Zinke has denied any particular favoritism towards Montana.
</p><p>
"I don't think that's supported by the facts," he told
<a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/16/us/ryan-zinke-montana.html" target="_blank">The New York Times</a> in April, noting that he halted oil and gas leases near New Mexico's Chaco Canyon and pushed for coastal redevelopment in Louisiana.
</p><p>
"I do listen to Montanans the same way I listen to Palau or the Virgin Islands," he added.
</p><p>
Yellowstone-area mining has been a concern since 2016 when proposals for a pair of gold mines popped up in the Emigrant and Crevice mining districts, according to the
<a href="https://www.sierraclub.org/sierra/new-mining-ban-around-yellowstone-moves-forward-zinke-montana" target="_blank">Sierra Club</a>. That prompted residents and local businesses to urge the U.S. Forest Service and the Bureau of Land Management to withdraw the area's public lands from mining. In response, then-Interior Secretary Sally Jewell <a href="https://www.doi.gov/pressreleases/obama-administration-protects-30000-acres-new-mining-claims-near-yellowstone-national" target="_blank">imposed</a> a two-year mining ban in the region, which was set to expire next month.
</p><p>
"This incredible victory for our first national park reminds us all that Yellowstone is more precious and valuable than gold," Theresa Pierno, president and CEO of
<a href="https://www.npca.org/" target="_blank">National Parks Conservation Association</a>, said in a <a href="https://www.npca.org/articles/1950-secretary-zinke-confirms-yellowstone-is-more-precious-than-gold" target="_blank">press release</a> Monday.
</p><p>
Pierno thanked Zinke and Agriculture Secretary Perdue for protecting the area from industrial gold mining.
</p><p>
"Their decision reflects the will of many and confirms that national parks can be a common ground in divided times," she said.
</p>
Read More
Show Less
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
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
Grand Teton National Park, Wyoming. Carol M. Highsmith Archive / Library of Congress
By Jillian Mackenzie
If you've visited the wilderness recently, you may have noticed something: people. People with walking sticks, people with selfie sticks, people with more people in tow. Surging numbers of visitors are hiking, camping, and all-around loving the outdoors. A whopping 330,882,751 of them spent 1.44 billion hours in our national parks in 2017—up 19 million hours from 2016. Great news, except that all this wilderness enthusiasm does come with a downside. "We're seeing record numbers of people connecting to nature, and that's a good thing," said Dana Watts, executive director of the Leave No Trace Center for Outdoor Ethics. "But with that comes an increase in the impact to the land."
<p>
Still, soil erosion, loads of litter, and risky animal encounters are entirely preventable if you stick to a few simple guidelines.
</p><p>
<strong>Plan your trip.</strong>
</p><p>
Whether you're a newbie or a <a href="http://www.appalachiantrail.org/home/community/2000-milers" target="_blank">2,000 miler</a>, taking off for a quick hike or embarking on a weeklong backpacking trip, never head outdoors haphazardly. "Always know exactly where you're going and what the conditions and weather are," Watts said. "Having the right gear, food, and clothing means you won't have to make bad decisions in the name of safety." The National Park Service (NPS) has a handy trip-planning guide that includes a list of "<a href="https://www.nps.gov/articles/10essentials.htm" target="_blank">Ten Essentials</a>" to help you stay safe on the trail; the list includes a navigation system, sun protection, insulation, illumination, a first-aid kit, a repair kit, nutrition, hydration, emergency shelter, and a fire kit. And speaking of flames, the NPS also provides a useful guide on safely building and extinguishing campfires. You'll definitely want to consult this guide before you get started, since research shows that <a href="https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/study-shows-84-wildfires-caused-humans-180962315/" target="_blank">84 percent of wildfires are caused by humans</a>.</p><p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-rebelmouse-image">
<img type="lazy-image" data-runner-src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8xODEzNDcxNS9vcmlnaW4uanBnIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTYyMzMwMDIyOX0.0wIJWCzB8fXexrjfEavT3T23OhqJ1xcoFmhGmm6D1Jo/img.jpg?width=980" id="a6b25" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="9e92ed9c9f18d2616ef6aa1af1ecadd2" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image">
<small class="image-media media-caption" placeholder="add caption...">From left: Ruth Glacier, Denali National Park, Alaska; Great Sand Dunes National Monument and Preserve, Colorado</small><small class="image-media media-photo-credit" placeholder="add photo credit...">Carol M. Highsmith Archive / Library of Congress</small></p><p><strong>Follow the posted rules.</strong><br></p><p>
Many hikers and campers head out into nature in pursuit of a rush of freedom, but this feeling of liberation doesn't mean that anything goes. "Most <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/public-lands">public lands</a> have regulations that all visitors must abide by, like having campfires only in designated areas, safely storing food, and not flying drones," said Mark Wenzler, senior vice president of <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/conservation">conservation</a> programs at the National Parks Conservation Association. (As drones gain popularity, they bring certain risks to the landscape, as happened in 2014 when <a href="https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-drones-yellowstone/drone-crashes-into-famed-hot-spring-at-yellowstone-national-park-idUSKBN0G62I620140806" target="_blank">one crashed into a famous Yellowstone hot spring</a>; the devices have since been <a href="https://www.nps.gov/articles/unmanned-aircraft-in-the-national-parks.htm" target="_blank">banned in our parks</a>.) To find out the rules for visiting a given park, be sure to check the "plan your visit" section of its website before heading out.</p><p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-rebelmouse-image">
<img type="lazy-image" data-runner-src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8xODEzNDcyMC9vcmlnaW4uanBnIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTYzNjQxNzM3MX0.SuvY_CEXphr83Zdvm-L0zNYExxV5gm19YRTQhJ_EOIU/img.jpg?width=980" id="e4f56" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="f31d7fd90f81bba91cabb5c1ccde02ed" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image">
<small class="image-media media-caption" placeholder="add caption...">Yosemite National Park, California</small><small class="image-media media-photo-credit" placeholder="add photo credit...">Carol M. Highsmith Archive / Library of Congress</small></p><p><strong>Stick to the trail.</strong><br></p><p>
Yes, it's the wilderness. But "the trail is there for a reason," Watts said. "Staying on durable surfaces helps protect vegetation." That's especially true on switchbacks. These paths are designed to prevent erosion, so never cut across. On any trail, you'll do less damage if you keep your group size small and always walk single file straight down the middle.
</p><p>
<strong>Handle your trash.</strong>
</p><p>
You know to pack up every last thing from your campsite and to use trash cans if they're available. But try to go a step further: Avoid bringing any disposable stuff like water bottles into a park. Right now, our national parks manage <a href="https://www.npca.org/resources/3180-infographic-on-zero-landfill-initiative" target="_blank">100 million pounds of waste</a> every year—including enough plastic bottles to motivate <a href="https://www.thenorthface.com/featured/bottle-source.html" target="_blank">one well-known activewear company</a> to create a line of upcycled T-shirts made from 160,000 pounds of the stuff, collected from just three parks. "None of us wants to see litter and overflowing trash bins in our parks," Wenzler said. "And we want our parks spending money on rangers and trails, not on trash disposal." (Some national parks are <a href="https://www.npca.org/articles/1292-study-reveals-lack-of-awareness-of-waste-challenges-facing-us-national" target="_blank">aiming for "zero landfill" status</a>.)</p><p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-rebelmouse-image">
<img type="lazy-image" data-runner-src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8xODEzNDcyOC9vcmlnaW4uanBnIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTYxMTIxMjQ1M30.j8LhlJIvR5lcCGG1XbzblXADTfhHm3BbeyNENQikaIY/img.jpg?width=980" id="e7f06" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="b07093aea4aa27c423593c681a155c3f" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image">
<small class="image-media media-caption" placeholder="add caption...">From left: North Window, Arches National Park, Utah; Volcanoes National Park, Hawaii</small><small class="image-media media-photo-credit" placeholder="add photo credit...">Carol M. Highsmith Archive / Library of Congress</small></p><p><strong>Appreciate the animals from a reasonable distance.</strong><br></p><p>
"One of the great things about heading outdoors is experiencing the magic of the <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/wildlife">wildlife</a>," said <a href="https://www.nrdc.org/experts/matt-skoglund" target="_blank">Matt Skoglund</a>, director of <a href="https://www.nrdc.org/" target="_blank">NRDC</a>'s Northern Rockies office. While human‒animal conflicts are rare, you still have to be smart. If you see a bison, moose, or mountain lion at close range, for example, don't try to feed it, approach it, or, for Pete's sake, take a selfie with it. (Bison, one of the biggest attractions for the more than four million tourists who come to <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/yellowstone-national-park">Yellowstone</a> each year, have injured more people than any other animal in the park, <a href="https://www.nps.gov/yell/planyourvisit/safety.htm" target="_blank">according to the NPS</a>.) "Give the animal some space, use common sense, and also use your senses," said Skoglund. In other words, stay vigilant while on the trail by carefully observing your surroundings, keeping your ears perked (and definitely earbud-free), and taking note of any whiff of wildlife along the way.
</p><p>
Of course, <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/animals/">animals</a> are able to sense you, too. For bears, <a href="https://www.recreation.gov/outdoors/Explore_And_More/exploreArticles/need-to-know-bear-facts-and-safety-tips.htm" target="_blank">smell is the sharpest sense</a>, spanning miles, and this means that for the most part, they can (and will) easily avoid you. As a result, while bears (especially grizzlies) inspire particular fear, sightings are rare, Skoglund said. If you do encounter a grizzly at close range, he said, "stay calm and don't run away. Take a few slow steps back and talk calmly to it. It will most likely turn and walk the other way. If not, and it charges you, use your <a href="https://www.nps.gov/yell/learn/nature/bearspray.htm" target="_blank">bear spray</a>—the most effective method of deterring an attack."</p><p>
If you do encounter an ursine, it'll much more likely be a black bear. "There are about 800,000 to 900,000 black bears in North America—that's 15 times the number of grizzly bears," said Stephen Matthew Herrero, professor emeritus of environmental science at the University of Calgary and the author of <em>Bear Attacks: Their Causes and Avoidance. </em>There are hundreds of thousands of encounters between bears and humans each year, but only one to three deaths. (Often the more violent encounters are triggered by dogs surprising or barking at bears; keeping Fido on a leash helps.) "In most cases, as soon as the bear senses you, it will leave," Herrero said. Otherwise, if it shows signs of stress—huffing loudly or swatting a paw at the ground—simply back away slowly. Don't run, or it may instinctively chase you.</p><p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-rebelmouse-image">
<img type="lazy-image" data-runner-src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8xODEzNDczMy9vcmlnaW4uanBnIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTYzMzE2MTI2Mn0.MqBgKqH17udiGX5S5lbRfniiV9H9COn2zFR5PkXocVc/img.jpg?width=980" id="7a82c" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="423857c99624aa0b8db636c0ca8414ec" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image">
<small class="image-media media-caption" placeholder="add caption...">Devils Tower National Monument, Wyoming</small><small class="image-media media-photo-credit" placeholder="add photo credit...">Carol M. Highsmith Archive / Library of Congress</small></p><p><strong>Pee responsibly.</strong><br></p><p>
If you're on the trail for more than a few hours, you're gonna need to go. For best pee and poop practices, you can check with the park's land manager. Or if you don't relish the thought of having that conversation in person, you can also look online. "Not all regulations will be posted at all places, but there will be site-specific and relevant information on most park websites," said Watts. The general rules of <a href="http://www.trailspace.com/articles/backcountry-waste-disposal.html" target="_blank">rules of thumb</a>: "If there are facilities, use them," Watts said. If not, and you're in the woods, pee far away from water, campsites and the trail. (One exception: "If you are recreating around or in high-volume running or moving water, like river rafting with overnight camping in designated areas, peeing directly in the water is sometimes the most appropriate," she said.) As for solid waste, "in the backcountry, dig a cat hole the depth of a hand and a half in an organic soil environment," she said. "And don't bury or burn your toilet paper; pack it out in a Ziploc bag." (Sorry, wilderness lovers, but it's just one of the many sacrifices we must make to keep nature intact.)</p><p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-rebelmouse-image">
<img type="lazy-image" data-runner-src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8xODEzNDc0OC9vcmlnaW4uanBnIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTY1MTUyMTkxMn0.aZODj4gbR5JxZoaA7SeqPK4ItYzxDb_nEsClbclk5dQ/img.jpg?width=980" id="78679" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="940655934c9e645bc478190782c87905" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image">
<small class="image-media media-caption" placeholder="add caption...">From left: South Rim, Grand Canyon National Park, Arizona; Bryce Canyon National Park, Utah</small><small class="image-media media-photo-credit" placeholder="add photo credit...">Carol M. Highsmith Archive / Library of Congress</small></p><p><strong>Wash responsibly, too.</strong><br></p><p>
The Leave No Trace Center for Outdoor Ethics recommends that when it's time to wash up, you should carry water 200 feet away from streams or lakes and use small amounts of biodegradable soap (that goes for both your body and your dishes). Also, skip the hand sanitizers and antibacterial soaps—they may seem convenient, but many of these products contain <a href="https://www.nrdc.org/stories/dirt-antibacterial-soaps" target="_blank">triclosan</a>, a hormone disruptor and a pesticide. Washing with antibacterial soap is no more effective than using regular soap and water to kill germs. Moreover, antibacterial products can contaminate a park's surface waters, as a <a href="https://www.nps.gov/articles/emerging-concern-among-every-day-chemicals.htm" target="_blank">study</a> by the Great Lakes Network, working in partnership with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and other monitoring groups, found after sampling waters from various parks in 2013 and 2014.
</p><p>
<strong>Speak out for our national monuments.</strong>
</p><p>
You can do even more for the parks you cherish by telling government officials <a href="https://www.nrdc.org/save-our-national-monuments" target="_blank">waging an attack on our public lands</a> that you oppose their actions and support our national monuments. President <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/trump-watch/">Trump</a> and U.S. Interior Department Secretary <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/ryan-zinke">Ryan Zinke</a> want to open up America's national monuments to extractive industries that can exploit, privatize, and profit from our lands and waters. And that's far more dangerous than the effects of tourism. "While visitors can have a big impact, the worst impacts on our public lands are caused by industrial and commercial development like oil and gas drilling near park boundaries, or coal-fired power plants in their airsheds," Wenzler said. Raising your voice—and casting your vote—are powerful ways to strike back.
</p><p>
So now, thrill-seeking and rule-abiding outdoor adventurers—get out there!</p><p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-rebelmouse-image">
<img type="lazy-image" data-runner-src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8xODEzNDc1NC9vcmlnaW4uanBnIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTYxNDU5MzE0OH0.jsz0jdyxEae8YEqQ3AXbDPhknpZ1fGWGhzdHxmGbMzQ/img.jpg?width=980" id="ffacb" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="5c17614142436ea8236012f443578d8f" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image">
<small class="image-media media-caption" placeholder="add caption...">Mesa Verde National Park, Colorado</small><small class="image-media media-photo-credit" placeholder="add photo credit...">Carol M. Highsmith Archive / Library of Congress</small></p>
From Your Site Articles
Related Articles Around the Web
Read More
Show Less
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
Trending
Conservation Groups: Fracking, Drilling Would Ruin Public Lands Near Colorado's Great Sand Dunes National Park
10 April 2018
Popular
Medano Creek, Great Sand Dunes National Park, Alamosa, CO. Gail K E / Flickr
Conservation groups are calling on the Trump administration to cancel plans to lease thousands of acres of federal public lands for oil and gas development near western Colorado's Great Sand Dunes National Park and Blanca Peak without fully analyzing environmental or cultural harms.
<p><a href="http://www.wildearthguardians.org/" target="_blank">WildEarth Guardians</a>, the <a href="http://www.biologicaldiversity.org/" target="_blank">Center for Biological Diversity</a>, <a href="https://foe.org/" target="_blank">Friends of the Earth</a>, <a href="http://rockymountainwild.org/" target="_blank">Rocky Mountain Wild</a>, <a href="http://www.slvec.org/" target="_blank">San Luis Valley Ecosystem Council</a>, <a href="https://www.sierraclub.org/" target="_blank">Sierra Club</a>, and <a href="http://www.wildconnections.org/" target="_blank">Wild Connections</a>, submitted extensive <a href="https://climatewest.files.wordpress.com/2018/04/fnl-co-sept-2018-ea-comments.pdf" target="_blank">comments</a> Friday on Interior Secretary <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/ryan-zinke">Ryan Zinke</a>'s <a href="https://eplanning.blm.gov/epl-front-office/eplanning/planAndProjectSite.do?methodName=dispatchToPatternPage&currentPageId=140375" target="_blank">proposal</a> to auction off 21,000 acres of public lands in Colorado in September. Of the lands nominated for auction, 18,000 acres are located near <a href="https://www.nps.gov/grsa/index.htm" target="_blank">Great Sand Dunes National Park</a> and Blanca Peak. In the comments, the groups noted that the Bureau of Land Management conducted little to no analysis on the potential harm from drilling and <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/fracking/">fracking</a> to Colorado's air, water, night skies, <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/wildlife">wildlife</a> habitat, cultural resources or the national park.</p><p>"The area near Great Sand Dunes National Park is uniquely beautiful and very susceptible to the harms from drilling and fracking," said Becca Fischer, a climate guardian with WildEarth Guardians. "Once BLM leases these lands, it cannot close the door to noise pollution, light pollution, and threats to our clean air and water. Yet, the BLM failed to conduct a meaningful analysis of these impacts."</p><p>"This fracking plan would ruin some of Colorado's most scenic, remote and valuable wildlife habitat," said Diana Dascalu-Joffe, a senior attorney with the Center for Biological Diversity. "Unfortunately nothing is more important to the Trump administration than fossil fuel industry profits."</p><p>Last month, in response to intense public pressure from <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/conservation">conservation</a> groups and others, Zinke <a href="https://climatewest.org/2018/03/09/victories-for-climate-public-lands-this-month/" target="_blank">removed public lands</a> in New Mexico near Chaco Canyon National Historical Park and in Montana near <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/yellowstone-national-park">Yellowstone National Park</a> from the auction block based on cultural and environmental concerns.</p><p>The pace of public lands approved for leasing by the BLM continues to drastically increase in 2018. In 2017 the BLM auctioned off more than <a href="https://climatewest.maps.arcgis.com/apps/MapJournal/index.html?appid=79dd79bad4ee476a8a87713f948b7ca2" target="_blank">1 million acres</a> of public lands for fracking in six western states. The BLM's proposed lease sales for the first half of 2018 in those same states already total almost <a href="http://climatewest.maps.arcgis.com/apps/MapJournal/index.html?appid=79dd79bad4ee476a8a87713f948b7ca2" target="_blank">1 million acres</a>. </p><p>Oil and gas leasing on federal public lands is a major contributor to <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/climate-change">global warming</a> in the U.S. Leasing opens the door for oil and gas drilling and fracking, and more <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/fossil-fuels">fossil fuel</a> burning. <a href="https://wilderness.org/federal-lands-emissions-accountability-tool" target="_blank">Reports</a> indicate that 20 percent of all greenhouse gas emissions in the U.S. can be traced back to fossil fuel development from federal public lands and waters.</p><p>"We should not be sacrificing these places, the wildlife there, history and opportunities to an outdated vision of energy independence," said Kimberly Pope, Sierra Club's Our Wild America organizer in Colorado. "We have an obligation to leave great natural places for others to experience."</p>
<p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-twitter_embed">
</p><div id="c229a" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="N7KFTH1576663079"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="940706629993095168" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">Trump, Zinke to Auction Away 700,000 Acres of Western Public Lands for Fracking https://t.co/FE5d2IsXN6… https://t.co/FLLTKIOG5p</div> — EcoWatch (@EcoWatch)<a href="https://twitter.com/EcoWatch/statuses/940706629993095168">1513116912.0</a></blockquote></div>
<p></p>
From Your Site Articles
Related Articles Around the Web
Read More
Show Less
conservation
public lands
colorado
great sand dunes national park
fracking
fossil fuels
donald trump
wildearth guardians
center for biological diversity
friends of the earth
rocky mountain wild
san luis valley ecosystem council
sierra club
wild connections
ryan zinke
wildlife
yellowstone national park
Yellowstone National Park. Timothy Woo / Flickr
By Sam Schipani
The federal government is moving forward with a plan to halt new mining claims in the Absaroka Mountains north of Yellowstone National Park. The plan would withdraw 30,370 acres of public lands in Montana's Paradise Valley from new claims for gold, silver and other mineral extraction for a period of 20 years.
<p style="">The mining withdrawal has been in the works since 2016. After proposals for a pair of gold mines popped up in the Emigrant and Crevice mining districts, residents and local businesses in the <a href="http://www.dontmineyellowstone.com/" target="_blank">Yellowstone Gateway Business Coalition</a> requested that the U.S. Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management withdraw the area's <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/public-lands">public lands</a> from mining. In response, the Interior Department <a href="https://www.doi.gov/pressreleases/obama-administration-protects-30000-acres-new-mining-claims-near-yellowstone-national" target="_blank">announced</a> exploration in the area would be halted pending a two-year review.</p><p style="">After releasing its draft environmental assessment for the mineral withdrawal last Thursday, the U.S. Forest Service announced its support for the 20-year ban on new mining claims in the area in order to protect scenic views, wildlife corridors and recreational opportunities.</p><p style="">The 20-year period is the longest that the Department of the Interior is able to block new mining without congressional action. Montana's Democratic Senator Jon Tester and Republican Representative Greg Gianforte have both introduced legislation to withdraw the lands from mining permanently.</p><p style="">Local residents and businesses intend to continue fighting for permanent protections. A <a href="https://www.bozemandailychronicle.com/news/environment/tester-gins-up-support-for-yellowstone-mining-claim-ban/article_89320512-590a-5212-bb85-15ef808c2e29.html" target="_blank">rally</a> hosted by Tester days before the the release of the draft analysis drew 200 people in support of permanently closing off the area to mining.</p><p style="">"The 20-year ban will give us a lot of time to get the permanent legislation passed," said <a href="https://www.sierraclub.org/sierra/unlikely-environmentalist-fights-gold-mine-near-yellowstone" target="_blank">Bryan Wells</a>, owner of Emigrant Creek Cabins and member of the Yellowstone Gateway Business Coalition. "Gold mines are historically short-lived, and Yellowstone tourism has been on the increase for 71 years straight without hardly a hiccup. You can't beat that kind of dependability for a local economy."</p><p>Because the withdrawal only covers public lands, however, it would not impact existing mining claims on private lands in the area. Even with the plan, an estimated 81 acres would be disturbed by existing claims and 4.5 miles of roads built, compared to 130 acres of land and seven miles of roads without the withdrawal.</p><p>Mining groups oppose the plan on the grounds that Emigrant Gulch and Crevice Mountain areas are historic mining districts.</p><p>"A mineral withdrawal of the magnitude under analysis appears to be a solution in search of a problem," wrote Tammy Johnson, executive director of the Montana Mining Association, in an email to Sierra. "At a time when the United States is becoming more dependent on foreign sources of strategic and critical minerals from countries like China, the U.S. should be opening more lands to mineral entry, not closing them."</p><p style="">Interior Secretary <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/ryan-zinke">Ryan Zinke</a> has the final say on whether the ban plan moves forward. Zinke, who has <a href="https://www.sierraclub.org/sierra/ryan-zinke-public-lands-for-whom" target="_blank">derailed protections for public lands</a> throughout the course of his first year in office, has come out in favor of the plan, which protects land in his home state of Montana.</p><p style="">"I've been fighting to protect the Paradise Valley and Yellowstone since I represented Montana in Congress," Zinke said in a statement Thursday. "I look forward to hearing from the community and seeing how we can work together to protect this area."</p><p style="">The Forest Service will release a final report and recommendation after a public comment period that ends April 29.</p>
<p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-twitter_embed">
</p><div id="6f6df" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="HTRU8S1576664284"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="966756895758405633" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">Uranium Mining's Toxic Legacy: Why the U.S. Risks Repeating Mistakes https://t.co/kCs60ZEvGF @CleanAirMoms… https://t.co/eewmTU2awu</div> — EcoWatch (@EcoWatch)<a href="https://twitter.com/EcoWatch/statuses/966756895758405633">1519327780.0</a></blockquote></div>
<p></p>
<p style=""><em>Reposted with permission from our media associate <a href="https://www.sierraclub.org/sierra/new-mining-ban-around-yellowstone-moves-forward-zinke-montana" target="_blank">SIERRA magazine</a>.</em></p>
From Your Site Articles
Related Articles Around the Web
Read More
Show Less
The main gate was blocked at Saguaro National Park as part of its semi-closed status during the shutdown. NPCA / Flickr
During the government shutdown, visitors to public lands encountered locked doors, deserted parks and ambiguous instructions.
The third weekend in January kicked off with a federal government shutdown. At least some Americans went ahead with their plans to visit national parks and other public lands, perhaps heartened by Interior Sec. Ryan Zinke's imprecise (yet exhaustively publicized) plan to keep them open.
<p>But by one estimate, <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/at-the-nations-parks-the-confusing-reality-of-the-government-shutdowns-first-day/2018/01/20/5d5927d2-fe08-11e7-8f66-2df0b94bb98a_story.html?utm_term=.fb2fcb678bb0" target="_blank">one-third of National Park Service-administered sites ended up closed</a> on Saturday, the first day the shutdown was in effect. This included the Statue of Liberty and Ellis Island, which quickly became the most visible symbols of the both the shutdown's effects and the dysfunction surrounding Zinke's plan (as a <a href="http://www.foxnews.com/us/2018/01/20/national-parks-open-or-closed-in-shutdown-its-hit-or-miss.html" target="_blank">vacationing firefighter told Fox News</a>, blaming unspecified politicians, "they really kind of screwed up our day"). New York Governor Andrew Cuomo later said <a href="https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-congress-shutdown-tourists/statue-of-liberty-to-reopen-shutdown-keeps-other-parks-monuments-closed-idUSKBN1FA0T8" target="_blank">he'd use state funds</a> to ensure the sites stay open.</p><p>That still left hundreds of parks theoretically open for people to enjoy, not to mention a variety of <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/national-monuments">national monuments</a>, national wildlife refuges and other public lands. And indeed, some parks were open—sort of. Per media accounts, visitors were met by a variety of <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/at-the-nations-parks-the-confusing-reality-of-the-government-shutdowns-first-day/2018/01/20/5d5927d2-fe08-11e7-8f66-2df0b94bb98a_story.html?utm_term=.2706bced3a59" target="_blank">staffing contingencies</a>, you're-on-your-own placards, <a href="http://fox13now.com/2018/01/21/government-shutdown-impacts-utah-national-guard-states-national-parks/" target="_blank">closed visitor centers</a> and even <a href="http://www.ktvq.com/story/37317082/yellowstone-visitors-speak-out-as-federal-government-shuts-down" target="_blank">shuttered restrooms</a>. At some parks, reduced search-and-rescue capacity and unsupervised roadways raised doubts about whether it was even safe to forge ahead.</p><p>Since park staff also serve a vital role protecting the land itself, the shutdown also allowed reckless behavior to creep in. At <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/yellowstone-national-park">Yellowstone National Park</a>, a concession operator allowed two clients to <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2018/01/22/while-yellowstones-staff-was-furloughed-a-snowmobiler-got-way-too-close-to-old-faithful/?utm_term=.71044c948a88" target="_blank">drive snowmobiles too close to Old Faithful</a>, violating park rules while most rangers were off work. </p><p>Many people trying to enjoy their public lands over the weekend encountered mixed messages. At Maryland's Blackwater National Wildlife Refuge, 62 miles from the White House as the crow flies, visitors were greeted by a locked gate—but also <a href="https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2018/jan/21/national-parks-monuments-open-under-trump-shutdown/" target="_blank">a sign explaining that, without staff, they could enter at their own risk</a>.</p><p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-rebelmouse-image">
<img type="lazy-image" data-runner-src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8xNzExNDYxMC9vcmlnaW4uanBnIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTYzNzIzMjEwNH0.GFBX9mjUXIPZel6-Jl5uyj8FYrJzDLjR3YVM2KwvEZA/img.jpg?width=980" id="b77bb" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="6049cfece338e28a06e605bd535da3b0" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image">
<small class="image-media media-caption" placeholder="add caption...">The Statue of Liberty and Ellis Island were both closed during the government shutdown.</small><small class="image-media media-photo-credit" placeholder="add photo credit...">NPCA / Flickr</small></p><p>The through-line of the signs, website updates and other communiques tasked with explaining the shutdown status was ambiguity.<br></p><p>Washington's <a href="https://www.nps.gov/mora/planyourvisit/conditions.htm" target="_blank">Mount Rainier National Park</a> and Colorado's <a href="https://www.nps.gov/romo/planyourvisit/important-shutdown-notice.htm" target="_blank">Rocky Mountain National Park</a> posted similar notices on their websites warning visitors that staff would be unable to provide the usual level of assistance or emergency response. But come Sunday, the former <a href="https://twitter.com/MountRainierNPS/status/955216356386922496" target="_blank">tweeted</a> a seemingly straightforward 'open for business' message ("Mount Rainier National Park Accessible to Public during Government Shutdown"), while the latter was still sharing an <a href="https://twitter.com/RockyNPS/status/954799762091532288" target="_blank">old tweet</a> advising guests that "Some RMNP areas are accessible, however access may change without notice." Each park ranks among the nation's most dangerous as <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2015/08/12/forget-bears-heres-what-really-kills-people-at-national-parks/?utm_term=.dede0118ca88" target="_blank">measured by yearly fatalities</a>; leaving them on a semi-operational status and offering protean or unclear messages to the public seems like a recipe for disaster. </p><p><strong>Shutdown a Reminder of Trump Administration's Uniquely Poor Conservation Record</strong></p><p>While all this was playing out, Secretary Zinke, showing the same knack for publicity that has led him to <a href="https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/ryan-zinke-interior-flag-rules_us_59f0e08ee4b0af27f58927dc" target="_blank">fly a personal flag</a> at the Department of the Interior and <a href="https://www.npr.org/2017/03/02/518152247/new-interior-secretary-rides-a-horse-to-first-day-on-the-job" target="_blank">ride a horse to his new office</a>, churned out social media posts that showed him greeting visitors to the National Mall, suggesting everything was proceeding as planned. </p><p>The confusion at public lands underscored the incoherence of the <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/trump-watch/">Trump</a> administration, which pays <a href="https://wilderness.org/grades-are-interior-secretary-zinke-no-teddy-roosevelt-conservationist" target="_blank">lip-service to the giants of American conservation</a> while <a href="https://wilderness.org/conservation-were-calling-it-worst-president-ever" target="_blank">working feverishly to undermine their achievements</a>. A couple days after Zinke posed for photos, with the shutdown still in effect, he signed an agreement authorizing a land exchange and <a href="https://wilderness.org/press-release/interior-eviscerates-fragile-wildlife-refuge-alaska-behind-closed-doors-during-shutdown" target="_blank">construction of a needless road</a> through Alaska's Izembek National Wildlife Refuge and its designated wilderness area. Fittingly, that agreement was the product of backroom dealings and a process that shirked transparency and ignored previous studies on the proposal. Say one thing, do another. </p><p>Keeping some parks open didn't undo the misdeeds of what is already a uniquely damaging presidency.</p><p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-twitter_embed">
</p><div id="43598" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="G4BND11576662787"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="953642933944815616" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">Majority of National Parks Panel Quits in Protest of Ryan Zinke https://t.co/1LNYh0y8ET #Zinke @NWF @NRDC… https://t.co/cNlS30lBlv</div> — EcoWatch (@EcoWatch)<a href="https://twitter.com/EcoWatch/statuses/953642933944815616">1516201167.0</a></blockquote></div>
<p></p>
From Your Site Articles
Related Articles Around the Web
Read More
Show Less