I once spotted and photographed a family of javelinas on the U.S./Mexico border near the San Pedro River in southeast Arizona.  Through my camera lens, I watched the silhouette of an adult javelina cautiously approach the ominous border wall, and stop with a grunt.  It was a haunting image.  I can’t pretend to know what natural instinct brought the javelina to the border that day, but seeing those wild creatures literally cut off from their habitat by a steel wall stretching on for miles beyond sight – it really stuck with me.

A lone animal faces the impenetrable border wall. (Photo: Matt Clark, Defenders of Wildlife)

Ironically, on a prior visit to this same location, I was guided by a local landowner to a spot where someone had used a simple nylon rope to scale and defeat the wall in seconds.  Walls, no matter how tall and well-reinforced, will never succeed in keeping determined people from crossing the border illegally.  Sadly though, these same walls will, and do, stop wildlife in their tracks, denying them the territory, resources and genetic exchange they need in order to survive and adapt in the arid environment of the borderlands.

A scientific study I contributed to, published in Conservation Biology in 2009, concluded that dispersal movements and population dynamics of many wildlife species could be significantly affected by security infrastructure, especially those species that are land-bound and large enough for walls to keep them out, those that fly at heights lower than 13 feet as they disperse, or those that rely on continuous habitat for cover or perches.  Just a small sample of species whose transboundary movements could be further compromised by barriers and other developments at the border include desert bighorn sheep, mountain lion, black bear, desert tortoise, pronghorn, pygmy owl, wild turkey and the endangered jaguar and ocelot.

Unfortunately, when crafting border security-related legislation in the past, many in Congress have ignored major environmental concerns and have trampled the rule of law itself in their zeal to seal the border.  In 2005, Congress passed a controversial provision in the Real ID Act (Section 102) to waive dozens of laws in order to construct hundreds of miles of damaging border walls and roads.  The 37 laws that were swept under the mat include bipartisan legislation passed to protect public health, farmland, Native American graves and freedoms, historic sites, wildlife and other sensitive natural resources.  This unprecedented waiver authority, which allows a political appointee – the Secretary of Homeland Security — to waive any and all laws of the United States, has resulted in avoidable and expensive environmental and property damage, created numerous safety hazards, and has harmed interagency cooperation and trust.

Bighorn sheep are just one of many species that are put at risk by the borderlines. (Photo: Sandy Sisti)

A poll conducted by YouGov in 2011 found that 64% of those polled oppose giving the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) discretion to waive environmental and other laws to build border infrastructure, and an identical number oppose congressional efforts to permanently waive such laws for border security.  This same poll found that the vast majority of Americans (92%) strongly prefer beefing up efforts at the Ports of Entry over spending billions of dollars on hundreds of miles of fencing in between the Ports.

The past damage done is bad enough, but now new threats are coming into play. Specific provisions in the immigration reform bill (S. 744) introduced into the Senate, run counter to public opinion and common sense.  The current version of S.744 would force DHS to develop a separate “Southern Border Fencing Strategy” and spend hundreds of millions to build yet more ineffective, environmentally harmful border walls. A very problematic provision in S. 744 would also further expand the existing waiver authority, enabling DHS to operate above the law for all border infrastructure and operations along the Southwest border, including building a sprawling network of forward operating bases, checkpoints, security camera tower s, roads and bright night lighting along the border and interior.  Collectively, this would add up to an unregulated, unmitigated environmental disaster with no accountability whatsoever.  To avoid such foreseeable folly, immigration reform legislation should be stripped of provisions that would enable walls and waivers. The proposal in S.744 for an even more expansive waiver is an unnecessary overreach – federal agencies are already operating effectively under an interagency agreement in place since 2006 that enables Border Patrol to have ready access to all lands along the border – including in designated wilderness – when a situation necessitates it.

The border wall extends for 670 miles, blocking wildlife from habitats. (Photo: Matt Clark, Defenders of Wildlife)

Even the current head of the DHS, Janet Napolitano, does not agree with the provision in S.744 that would dictate more wall building.  When testifying before Congress on the provision that would require dedicated funding for more walls she said, “We would prefer having money not so designated so that we can look at technology, air-based, ground-based, manpower, other needs that may be more fitting to prevent illegal flows across the Southwest border.”  This is the same reasoned voice who, as Arizona’s governor, bluntly stated: “You show me a 50-foot wall and I’ll show you a 51-foot ladder at the border. That’s the way the border works.”

What the border needs is not another set of ineffective, ecologically harmful walls and unpopular waivers, but rather more ingenuity and interagency collaboration that will foster the development of common sense, win-win solutions for both security and environmental concerns.

A 2010 report on interagency cooperation on U.S./Mexico border wilderness issues listed many successful efforts in the past where agencies have worked together to bolster border security. The report concludes: “The twin values of national security and public lands stewardship can be simultaneously fulfilled, but it will take continued interagency cooperation to assure this happens.”  The practice of waiving laws as a means to an ends is counterproductive; doing so only serves to eliminate the critical public processes and damage the trust that enables such interagency cooperation to occur and thrive.  As a nation, we can and must do better than walls and waivers. The future of our diverse borderlands region, and the wildlife it supports, depend on it.

Spring is one of the most beautiful times of year in the Rockies. Native flowers explode across the landscape, accenting a verdant quilt of new grass. The snow recedes, leaving only white caps on mountain peaks. Storms bring sudden bursts of rain or late snow, followed by robin’s egg-blue skies and golden sunshine. A new generation of deer fawns, bear cubs, moose and elk calves, and nests of hatching chicks all emerge as the land renews itself and comes to life once again.

Guard dogs and people work together to protect sheep.

But spring is also lambing time in the region, and it’s the return of both wildlife and livestock that signals the beginning of our field season. My job is to find practical ways for both hungry predators and vulnerable livestock to share the landscape.

The Wood River Wolf Project was initiated in 2008 to demonstrate the use of nonlethal deterrents to prevent livestock and predator losses in our project area. Over the past five years, documented sheep losses to wolves in the project area have been far lower than wolf range in other parts of the state during the same period (see map below with last year’s estimates). Last year, we protected more than 27,000 sheep in our 1,000-square mile project area and lost only four in one accidental encounter with an undocumented wolf pack.

Ranchers are reporting fewer losses to other predators in the project area as well. Because of our success in protecting sheep from predators, no wolves within the project area have been lethally removed due to depredation conflicts. It’s a major win for both wildlife and agriculture.

County officials and our ranching partners are encouraging the project team to continue expanding our efforts and make all of Blaine County, Idaho (2,645 square miles) the first official predator-friendly county in wolf range in the western United States. We welcome the opportunity but have run into a serious obstacle: one of our key project partners has unfortunately decided to use lambing techniques that put his flocks at serious risk.

Specifically, this producer is using a technique known as “range lambing,” which means taking several thousand sheep and leaving small groups of newborn lambs and their mothers spread over miles of remote rangeland adjacent to national forests and mountainous terrain. While there are some herders in the general area to help guard the sheep, there are not enough to even begin to effectively deter predators. To make matters worse, some ewes and lambs inevitably die as a result of birthing difficulties, and their carcasses draw birds like ravens and buzzards, which in turn draw the attention of predators for miles around. It’s a train wreck for those working to resolve wolf and livestock predation conflicts using nonlethal methods — regrettably, one we predicted would happen (Read more from the Idaho Statesman).

In the Wood River Wolf Project, sheep are sometimes penned in night corrals using highly portable electric fladry.

Most sheep producers use large sheds while lambing to help protect their ewes from bad weather and predation. Properly managed “shed lambing” also allows more lambs to survive because they receive better care during the birthing process and as newborns. A few producers use pasture or range lambing techniques to help them reduce costs of feeding or labor during lambing. Though popular in places like New Zealand and England, this technique is considered the most vulnerable to predators and has largely been abandoned by commercial sheep operations in the western United States.

Unfortunately, as feed prices increase, the incentive to lamb on open range has a stronger appeal to those who don’t grow their own feed or who want to cut expenses. These producers risk losing their sheep to predators and rely on government agencies to kill native wildlife to protect them. The top agency responsible for protecting domestic animals from predation is the U.S. Dept. of Agriculture’s Wildlife Services. While the agency’s vision is to “improve the coexistence of people and wildlife,” it is also responsible for the killing of more wildlife than any other agency. In 2012 alone, Wildlife Services killed 1,586,932 native wildlife including 503 gray wolves, 567 black bears, 1,062 bobcats, 76,611 coyotes and 4,230 foxes, largely on behalf of ranching operations. However, recent research clearly indicates that lethal predator control doesn’t stop livestock losses over the long run. When predators like wolves are killed, the territory is only vacant for a short time before new wolves move in and begin killing livestock, usually within a year.

As our wolf project team of biologists and researchers begins the new field season, it is with great disappointment over the conflicts occurring on the east side of the county where sheep, wolves and other predators are being killed. The most tragic part is that the deaths of both wolves and livestock are largely preventable. We will continue to reach out to all our ranching partners to promote nonlethal alternatives over the traditional lethal control methods that have resulted in the unnecessary loss of these animals, both wild and domesticated. This is the whole purpose behind our efforts and after five years of success, we feel certain that we’re on the right track.

And we’re not alone. Here’s a quote from a letter we received just last week:

“ The Board of Blaine County Commissioners wishes to express to you its continued support of the non-lethal wolf management program that Defenders of Wildlife has facilitated in our County over the past five years… Deterrence of wolf predation on livestock, [in target areas] has proven effective in minimizing and nearly eliminating wolf depredation on sheep in these areas… We highly commend those who have participated directly in this project, who by their actions have chosen to demonstrate to the world means by which men and wolves might co-exist.”

Great words of encouragement as we enter the sixth year of the Wood River Wolf Project! We also owe a huge thanks to the Forest Service for all the help in supporting our field team and maintaining good communication efforts between them and the livestock managers.

Our team spotted these wolf tracks along the road just a week into the project.

Our team met last week with state wildlife managers to talk about our methods this summer. We’re adding a new tool to the box: solar-powered lights that flash at night and appear to frighten away predators. We’re excited about testing them in the field. We’re also adding a number of field cameras to document wolves and other wildlife. Our data from the first five years of the project are being collected and analyzed to prepare for eventual publication so we can share this information more broadly. And next month, the Forest Service is hosting our training workshop in Idaho for wildlife managers and ranchers interested in learning more about nonlethal wolf, bear, cougar and coyote deterrents and livestock husbandry techniques to reduce risks of predation. A part of the workshop will also be recorded for those interested in learning more about these techniques.

We’ll be busy, but we wouldn’t have it any other way. And every time we find wolf tracks, hear their howls or see their images on our field cameras, we are grateful for the opportunity to help these animals continue to thrive in one of the wildest places left in the continental United States.

Compromise reached in Oregon

The agreement reached last week will require ranchers to demonstrate that they have implemented nonlethal deterrents and other proactive strategies to reduce conflict before any wolves are killed. Further, only wolves involved in four or more depredations in a six-month period can be removed, and information regarding the incidents must be made readily available to the public. While this does mean that some wolves are likely to be removed later this year based on current trends, ranchers will now be responsible for protecting their herds before the state will intervene.

Read more from our friends at Cascadia Wildlands, who were part of the settlement.

Wolf tracks. Photo courtesy of U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service.

MT, WY move in opposite directions – Montana and Wyoming are both moving forward with changes to their wolf hunting regulations for next season, but the two states are moving in opposite directions. Wyoming plans to cut their quota in half, reducing the number of wolves that can be killed in the trophy management area from 52 to 26. Last year, a total of 42 wolves were killed by licensed hunters in Wyoming. Another 43 wolves have been killed already in the so-called “predator zone,” dropping the total population by about 16 percent. With only an estimated 277 wolves left in the entire state at the end of 2012, including 83 in Yellowstone, wildlife managers are concerned that another aggressive year could bring the overall population dangerously close to the minimum of 100 to 150 wolves per state, which will trigger a status review to see if wolves should be relisted. Without that safety net in place, there’s no telling how low each of the states would go.

Meanwhile, Montana is ratcheting up its wolf-killing efforts by extending the season by a month and allowing hunters and trappers to kill up to five wolves instead of just three. Last year, Montana hunters and trappers killed 225 wolves, dropping the overall population by about four percent. Though that is a relatively minor decline, we’d rather see the state focus on maintaining wolves at current levels instead of trying to drive numbers farther down.

There’s still time to comment on both the Wyoming and Montana wolf hunting regulations. Comments on the Wyoming proposal are due June 12 and can be submitted here online. Comments on the Montana proposal are due by June 24^th and can be submitted here online.

Fulfilling Isaiah’s prophecy – We often like to brag about our Wood River Wolf Project, but never before have we felt worthy of biblical allusion… until now!

Last year, 27,000 sheep were in the project area around the Wood River Valley; two or three packs of wolves were on landscape. They lived in harmony with only one late incident when the bands of sheep came upon wolves no one knew were there. Four sheep were killed.

What they had achieved on a small scale was the prophesy of Isaiah: “In that day the wolf and the lamb will live together.” – Rocky Barker, Idaho Statesman

A recent incident with a Blaine County sheep producer emphasizes our success. The owner of the Flat Top Ranch has lost 31 sheep already this year by ignoring our advice and leaving unguarded animals spread across public lands in the heart of wolf country. Sadly, his losses offer the perfect counterexample of what can happen when appropriate steps aren’t taken to prevent conflict.

Seeing signs – Traveling to Yellowstone National Park this summer to see wolves? Then, you might notice something new on your drive in. Our friends at Predator Defense have paid for billboards that remind park visitors that Yellowstone’s wolves are now at risk of being shot the moment they step outside the park’s boundaries. A handful of these iconic animals have already been killed in Idaho, Montana and Wyoming, including some of the park’s most famous wolves, beloved by wolf-watchers worldwide. That’s part of the reason we continue to fight against the premature delisting of gray wolves– to make sure the same fate doesn’t befall wolves in other parts of the country. If you haven’t already, please support our campaign to maintain federal protections for gray wolves.

What’s in store for grizzlies in the lower 48? After more than 30 years of protection under the Endangered Species Act, there are an estimated 1600-1700 grizzly bears south of the Canadian border. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and other land and wildlife management agencies have made significant progress restoring grizzly bears to a portion of their historic range. But much remains to be accomplished to assure our children and grandchildren will be able to enjoy and appreciate this noble symbol of America’s natural heritage.

Map of grizzly bear recovery areas, courtesy of USFWS.

Currently, the majority of grizzly bears can be found in just two major ecosystems with the rest scattered across much smaller subpopulations. Here’s a quick breakdown of all grizzly bear populations found in the lower 48:

• The 9,600-square mile Northern Continental Divide ecosystem (NCDE) in Montana includes Glacier National Park and the Bob Marshall Wilderness, and is home to an estimated 900-1,000 grizzly bears. This population is relatively stable and has continued to increase slightly each year.
• The 9,200-square mile greater Yellowstone ecosystem (GYE) includes Yellowstone National Park and an estimated 600 to 700 grizzly bears. This population appears to have stabilized at current levels.
• The 2,200-square mile Selkirk ecosystem in northeastern Washington, northern Idaho and southern Canada has fewer than 100 grizzly bears with a slight increase each year.
• The 2,600-square mile Cabinet-Yaak ecosystem in northwestern Montana and northern Idaho has fewer than 50 grizzly bears. This population continues to decline slightly each year, but the decline appears to be tapering off.
• The 9,500-square mile North Cascades ecosystem in Washington has fewer than 20 grizzly bears and very little is known about them. In order to recover this population, grizzly bears will likely need to be added to the area from other populations.
• The 5,600-square mile Bitterroot ecosystem that straddles western Montana and central Idaho is currently void of grizzly bears but has been identified as containing excellent bear habitat and is key to connecting the GYE and NCDE populations.

The long-term survival of any species depends on the number and size of individual sub-populations, survival rates of each and connectivity between populations – the larger and more connected, the better the bears can withstand natural disasters, disease or extreme food shortages. For example, the Cabinet-Yaak ecosystem is currently  disconnected from the larger and more robust NCDE population. That’s why the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and state agencies are moving bears from the NCDE to the Cabinet-Yaak in an effort to save this population. This is desperately needed for the isolated North Cascades population as well, but politics has delayed grizzly bear augmentations here.

Securing quality habitat, improving human tolerance and minimizing conflicts between grizzly bears and people, particularly on private lands within or between identified recovery areas, will continue to be an ongoing challenge. But by working together, we can make sure that grizzly bears have safe passage to move across the landscape, thereby improving genetic diversity and boosting bear populations in more vulnerable ecosystems.

To that end, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service recently released its draft Northern Continental Divide Ecosystem (NCDE) Grizzly Bear Conservation Strategy. The strategy is intended to guide the management of grizzly bears and habitat protections on public lands after federal Endangered Species Act protections are removed. Among other things, the strategy would create a Primary Conservation Area, three additional management zones, and two Demographic Connectivity Areas. This geographic arrangement is designed to maintain a stable core population while providing varying degrees of protection in key linkage areas to encourage bears to disperse.

The Service has also proposed revisions to the Greater Yellowstone Recovery Plan that may change future population estimates. The GYE is the most isolated population in the lower 48 and has been hovering close to federal recovery objectives for several years. It is critical that bears in this population are able to expand into secure habitats that will once again link them with the more genetically diverse NCDE population and/or other grizzly bear populations.

As we close out Bear Awareness Week, we would like to celebrate the significant efforts put into grizzly bear recovery. It was humans that drove bears from an estimated 50,000 animals to fewer than 1,000 bears over approximately 170 years. And it is humans that must bring them back. Grizzly bears are the second slowest reproducing land mammal in North America, so recovery will not happen overnight. However, multiple conservation groups, local communities and agencies are dedicating efforts to ensure a place for grizzly bears in the lower 48 states.

The future of grizzly bears remains uncertain, but as Abraham Lincoln said, “The best thing about the future is that it comes one day at a time.” Together with our partners, we will continue to work one day at a time to minimize grizzly bear deaths and improve social tolerance through continued outreach and on-the-ground coexistence projects.

Help us run more ads like this one that ran in the Washington Post Express today.

Service delays national delisting…for now – We were all surprised and greatly relieved on Monday when the Associated Press reported that the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service was delaying indefinitely its premature national gray wolf delisting proposal (see our press statement). Hopefully, the delay means that the Obama administration is rethinking its position. Perhaps the 112,295 (and counting) email messages our wolf supporters have sent to Interior Secretary Sally Jewell haven’t fallen on deaf ears. Or maybe it was convincing letters from independent biologists, the American Society of Mammalogists and Rep. Raul Grijalva (D-Ariz.) sent to agency officials in the past week that made the difference. Whatever it was, we need to keep the pressure up to ensure that this isn’t just a temporary reprieve. Wolves still need federal protection to recover in vast areas with excellent habitat, such as the Pacific Northwest, northern California and the southern Rockies. You can help us secure a brighter future for wolves by supporting our latest outreach efforts, including an advertising campaign that launched today in the Washington Post Express!

Meanwhile, our colleagues at Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility filed a lawsuit demanding information from 2010 meetings between state and federal agencies regarding wolf biology and management. Their efforts may help reveal the motivation behind the premature delisting of gray wolves in the Northern Rockies and shed light on current plans to abandon wolf recovery nationwide. As PEER Executive Director Jeff Ruch said, “By law, Endangered Species Act decisions are supposed to be governed by the best available science, not the best available deal.” We couldn’t agree more, and Defenders Executive Vice President Don Barry emphasized that point on the air recently when he had the chance to discuss the importance of maintaining the integrity of the ESA and protections for gray wolves. Listen to his interview with KTVA near Los Angeles:

Bill sponsors and supporters join Gov. Inslee for the signing of critical wolf funding legislation in Washington.

Gov. Inslee signs wolf funding bill — Washington ranchers will soon have more resources at their disposal to help wolves and livestock coexist, thanks to the state legislature. Gov. Jay Inslee signed a bill this week that is expected to raise more than one million dollars for nonlethal wolf conservation management efforts and compensation for livestock producers.  Champions of the bill included Representatives Hans Dunshee and Kristine Lytton and Senators Kevin Ranker and Christine Rolfes.  Defenders regional wolf conservationist Suzanne Stone was present at signing and added, “This is a great example of the benefit of working collaboratively to tackle conflicts instead of just fighting over them.  This legislation is a win for wolves and for ranchers.” Thanks to all our colleagues and supporters in Washington and across the country who helped get this key piece of legislation passed and signed!

Oregon livestock losses highlight need for nonlethal deterrents – According to the latest update from Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, the state’s wolves have been getting into more trouble with livestock. Last week, OR-4 of the Imnaha pack was implicated in the death of a yearling cow, and at least one Umatilla wolf was involved with the death of four sheep. Overall livestock losses to wolves are still extremely low in Oregon, as well as across the rest of the West. But these incidents provide an important wake-up call for ranchers in the region who are turning their animals out on pasture this spring and summer. Using proactive strategies and nonlethal deterrents is essential to minimizing livestock losses in wolf country. Often all it takes is a few guard dogs, a range rider or portable fencing to ensure that livestock and wildlife can safely coexist. Such measures will be vitally important as wolves continue to expand into areas where they have been absent for nearly 80 years.

Discover wolves in North America – A new series called “North America” premiered on the Discovery Channel on Sunday, and of course wolves were featured prominently. Watch these incredible clips of wild wolves chasing bison and caribou, engaged in the perennial showdown between predator and prey:

In the spring of 2009, two grizzly bears named Rainy and Scarhip were seen frolicking through fields and across highways. Soon thereafter, both bears were captured near Seeley Lake, Montana and fitted with tracking collars. To have any chance of survival, Rainy and Scarhip would have to avoid a variety of temptations, including garbage cans, birdfeeders, and chicken coops – all containing delicious snacks for a hungry bear.

A grizzly bear roams into an apple orchard.

Needless to say, the outlook was not good, and Scarhip was getting into people’s yards almost immediately. But food attractants aren’t the only threat to grizzly bears, and in October of 2009, Scarhip was mistakenly shot and killed by a black hear hunter. Meanwhile, Rainy stayed out of trouble all summer long before heading to her den north of Lake Alva. The following spring she emerged with two cubs and spent the next few months in the Placid Lake area. Then, suddenly, on July 14th, she was documented near Seeley Lake again, feeding on garbage, grain, bird seed and dog food. Females with cubs need as many calories as they can find, and Rainy had hit the jackpot.

That was the beginning of the end for Rainy. Before long, she and her cubs were climbing onto porches, damaging buildings and approaching people. Due to escalating concerns for human safety, Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks decided to trap all three bears. But it was too late — one of Rainy’s cubs was hit by a car crossing Highway 83. A month later, FWP trapped Rainy and her remaining cub and sent them to a zoo in Tulsa, Oklahoma. Sadly, the cub died a year later from a rare fungal infection, while Rainy still remains at the zoo.

The saddest part of the story, however, is that the loss of these bears was almost entirely avoidable. Simple solutions like electric fencing are highly effective at securing attractants like bee yards, apple orchards, lambing pastures, chicken coops and compost piles. Other successful deterrents include bear-resistant garbage enclosures and using livestock guard dogs, range riders and alternative grazing methods.

Some of these tools can be expensive, but there are resources available to help residents protect their property and prevent conflict. For example, Defenders of Wildlife started a program in 2010 to help pay for smaller fencing projects. So far the program has secured 58 sites in Montana and helped save grizzly bears.

Electric fencing around bear attractants like chicken coops can make a big difference.

Take the Morris family, for instance. They’re a 4-H family from northwest Montana with pigs, goats, sheep and chickens. Last year, the Morrises routinely had grizzly bears on their property and had Montana Fish Wildlife and Parks on “speed dial.” They wanted to install a sturdy electric fence but didn’t think they could afford one. FWP directed the Morrises to our incentive program, which helped pay for installing the fence they wanted — a win-win solution for both bears and people. The Morrises finished their electric fence last October and are expecting local wildlife residents to be quite “shocked” when they come around this spring.

Since 1997, Defenders of Wildlife has also been compensating ranchers for livestock losses to grizzly bears. This year, Montana will take this program over through the state’s Livestock Loss Board. Though not a perfect solution, compensation programs help mitigate the financial impact on ranchers and their families. But compensation only addresses conflicts after the damage has already been done. It’s far better to find ways to prevent conflicts from occurring in the first place. And on the rare occasions when these tools aren’t enough, wildlife managers need the flexibility to relocate or remove grizzly bears that are deemed a serious threat to humans.

Aldo Leopold, the grandfather of wildlife conservation, once wrote, “Relegating grizzlies to Alaska is about like relegating happiness to heaven; one may never get there.”

By the late 1800s, this became a real fear. An estimated population of 50,000 grizzly bears plummeted to just a few hundred in less than one percent of their historic range. Fortunately, grizzly bears were protected under the Endangered Species Act in 1975 and have been making a strong comeback ever since. Today, there are approximately 1,700 grizzly bears in the lower 48. Most of us have welcomed these magnificent creatures back to our landscape. But it will take concerted efforts by all of us living in grizzly country to ensure continued recovery of the species. Ultimately, the fate of grizzly bears in Montana and across the West still rests in our hands.

I hope grizzlies are never relegated to Alaska nor happiness to heaven. And hopefully, by working together, we can ensure that our children and grandchildren can continue to find both right here in Montana.

To learn more about what you can do to coexist with grizzly bears, visit defenders.org/GotGrizzlies.

Originally published by Montana Public Radio