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

My first bear encounter

In the late ‘90s, I was working in Yellowstone National Park as a waitress, a city girl inexperienced about wilderness. Wildlife, in my mind, consisted only of the opossums, deer, raccoons and squirrels that had frequented my neighborhood in Missouri. Little did I know, my summer job would forever change my conception of wildlife – and my entire life.

A family moment. (Photo Credit: Stephen Oachs)

One sunny day I set out on a hike with friends into Hayden Valley. The grass was as tall as me, gold and thick, and bison grazed in every direction. Suddenly, we noticed a grizzly bear off in the distance. My instinct was to run in the opposite direction, and I actually did briefly until a friend asked where I was going. Sheepishly, I stopped. We took out our binoculars and the grizzly stood up, her coat gleaming in the afternoon sun. Then, the small brown head of bear cub popped out of the grass. Finally, a third grizzly bear emerged, slightly larger than the little cub. Three grizzlies! At once, all three bears dropped into the tall grass and disappeared.

Media headlines were racing though my head: “Female grizzly attacks hikers to defend her cubs!” I was horrified and certain that she was going to pop up right in front of us—a mad, mama bear—but I couldn’t have been more wrong. Soon, she reappeared farther off, near a wet, muddy hole. She lay down on her back watching the other two roll in the mud.

In that exact moment I was forever changed. All the information I had received about bears through movies, TV and news articles was inaccurate and sensational. This was beyond a doubt, what we humans like to call a “family moment.” The cubs were playing while mom soaked up some sunshine. I knew I had to better educate myself about bears and that I needed to share what I learned.

Helping people and grizzlies coexist

This moment comes to mind every spring when bears emerge from hibernation and we start gearing up for our summer field season. For the past 10 years, I’ve been working to promote tolerance and find ways for humans and grizzlies to coexist. My job is to make sure that people are doing their part to secure attractants so that bears can keep themselves out of trouble and continue to thrive on the landscape.

Me and Russ doing grizzly bear outreach in Missoula, Mont.

My colleague Russ Talmo and I got started early this year by participating in several workshops and outreach events. This included talking about raising chickens in bear country at two Montana Pastured Poultry Workshops hosted by the National Center for Appropriate Technology in cooperation with Montana Fish Wildlife and Parks. We also set up remote cameras at a lambing pasture on the Rocky Mountain Front and, while we didn’t catch any bears, we do have footage of a coyote, a skunk, raccoons and lots of sheep.

Right now grizzlies are out of their dens looking for food such as glacier lilies, spring grasses  and deer and elk that have died over the winter. But anthropogenic attractants like garbage, birdfeeders, livestock, bees and chickens can quickly lure a winter-starved grizzly. To help keep bears away from these potential food sources, Defenders started an Electric Fencing Incentive program three years ago that reimburses residents 50% of the cost of an electric fence around a bear attractant. Between 2010 and 2012 we completed 58 fences. This year our goal is to complete another 50 fencing projects, and we are well on our way with over 25 people signed up already to participate.  Additionally, we are working with livestock producers on larger electric fence projects, range rider programs and helping to purchase livestock guard dogs.

I’ll keep you posted as our field season gets under way. We have lots of coexistence projects to complete and lots of great stories to share from our partners, so stay tuned!

According to the Idaho Mountain Express, ranch owner John Peavey has lost at least 31 sheep to wolves in the past week, offering a perfect example of what NOT to do in wolf country. Instead of providing extra protection for his ewes while they give birth to their lambs, he has sent them out on the range where they attract numerous wildlife species. Scavenging birds such as vultures and ravens pick over the afterbirth, and wolves, coyotes and other scavenging mammals follow soon thereafter. Once hungry predators are in the area, there’s nothing to stop them from going after defenseless lambs or their mothers. As our wolf expert Suzanne Stone says, it’s like setting the table and ringing the dinner bell for any carnivores in the area to enjoy the feast.

Defenders has repeatedly offered to help the Flat Top Ranch implement proactive strategies and nonlethal deterrents to prevent conflict, but each time our advice has been ignored. However, this does offer an important counterexample that proves the effectiveness of our work – none of our project partners have suffered similar losses. In fact, most ranchers we work with seldom lose sheep at all to wolves when properly guarded. In 2012, we protected 27,000 sheep and lost only four to wolves during the summer grazing season over a more than 1,000-square-mile project area. We stand ready and willing to help the Flat Top Ranch once they make the decision to stop range lambing methods that result in preventable losses of sheep, wolves and other native wildlife.

Atka goes to Washington.

A wolf in Washington? – That’s right. An arctic wolf was spotted in Washington, D.C. this week on Capitol Hill. Atka, an ambassador wolf from the Wolf Conservation Center in New York, was in town for a reception co-hosted by Defenders of Wildlife to celebrate the launch of our Conservation Crossroads campaign, as well as the 40^th anniversary of the Endangered Species Act. What’s more — today is not only Atka’s 11^th birthday, it’s also Endangered Species Day! So pop the champagne, we all have something to celebrate this week.

Washington wolves move west – Speaking of wolves in Washington… Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife is working with ranchers outside Wenatchee to provide safe passage for wolves traveling west through the state. For example, rancher Doug Hurd is keeping his cattle on a pasture with an electrified fence a little longer instead of turning his cattle out onto open rangelands while wolves chase elk and deer herds through the area. The precautionary measure should help prevent wolves from preying on the cattle and keep the wolves focused on hunting wild prey. Ensuring these natural movements across the landscape is vital to further wolf recovery in the state, as wolves start returning to central Washington. See the full report from King5’s Gary Chittim:

Montana proposes wolf hunting expansions – The public can now weigh in on a proposal that would extend Montana’s hunting season another month through the end of March and allow hunters to kill up to 10 wolves each. The proposed revisions would also permit hunters to shoot wolves standing near baited traps (read the full story from Reuters). Though the state’s wolf population dropped seven percent this past year, Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks is still attempting to reduce wolf numbers even further. Please tell the state wildlife commissioners to reject the proposed changes and focus on promoting tolerance and coexistence instead of more wolf killing. Click here for details on how to submit public comments.

Yellowstone area rancher forfeits second kill permit – KPAX reports that a rancher embroiled in a controversy over the killing of a Yellowstone wolf has forfeited his shoot-on-sight permit to kill a second wolf. The man has apparently removed his cattle from the area to their summer pasture and has moved his remaining sheep as well. He had killed a female wolf (831F) from Yellowstone’s Canyon Pack while she was on his property, after allegedly losing 13 sheep to a pair of wolves in a prior incident. The wolf he shot was not the one responsible for attacking the sheep but was likely lured to the site by a sheep carcass that was left behind. Hopefully the rancher will take additional steps to protect his livestock in the future, avoiding the need to kill more wolves.

Wetlands in Izembek National Wildlife Refuge (©USFWS)

Isabel Ricker, Landscape Conservation Coordinator

A few months ago we told you about an important milestone being reached in the battle to preserve the wilderness and wetland integrity of the Izembek National Wildlife Refuge in Alaska. This occurred when the Fish and Wildlife Service released its final environmental impact statement (EIS) recommending against building a $30 million road through the refuge. When a federal agency issues a final EIS, it has to wait at least 30 days before it can finalize its recommendation and begin its implementation. When the Service issued the Izembek EIS, the final decision rested in the hands of then-Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar, but he subsequently retired from office without resolving the dispute over the proposed Izembek road.

So where do things stand at this point with regards to that road? Despite having fallen off the political radar screen in recent weeks, the future of this incredible wildlife refuge remains as uncertain as ever. And for that we can thank Congressional politics playing out as usual.

The problem stemmed from Salazar’s retirement and the need for the Senate to confirm his proposed successor, Sally Jewell. Senator Lisa Murkowski of Alaska threatened to block Jewell’s nomination unless the Department reversed the Service’s recommendation against the Izembek road. So at the last moment before a vote on her nomination, an unfortunate deal was struck by the Department which agreed to seek further public comment from the supporters of the road. The deal between Senator Murkowski and Interior will likely delay a final decision on Izembek for many months, but it does not bind or force the Department to ultimately approve the road. So the fate of Izembek now rests in Sally Jewell’s hands.

Many species of birds, especially the Pacific black brant, rely on Izembek’s protected habitat (©Ryan Hagerty/USFWS)

Izembek was established in 1960 to protect some of the most distinctive and important wetlands in the world, and is home to an abundance of wildlife, including 98% of the world’s population of Pacific black brant (a sea bird), as well as grizzly bear, caribou, and salmon. The proposed road would bisect refuge and designated wilderness lands in order to connect the communities of King Cove and Cold Bay, crossing sensitive wetlands as well as steep slopes prone to avalanches. Numerous studies – by the federal government, the state of Alaska and wildlife experts – have concluded since the 1980s that a road through Izembek would permanently and significantly damage the wilderness and wildlife habitat value of the refuge. Furthermore, the road would set a dangerous precedent of sacrificing our nation’s protected wilderness national wildlife refuges for indefensible development projects.

The damage from the road is not being exaggerated. In the final EIS for the project, which was released earlier this year, the Service determined that the road would require the construction of eight bridges, 19 culverts and 254 stream crossings. Despite this unambiguous assessment by the Service, proponents of the road continued to push for its approval, saying that the road is a public health necessity for King Cove. Ironically, the village of King Cove had previously been provided with a $9 million all-weather hovercraft to cross the bay in medical emergencies to the air strip at Cold Bay, but the community ultimately gave the hovercraft away.

The hovercraft that they no longer wanted was able to reach Cold Bay in 20 minutes in a medical emergency. By contrast, the proposed road would take more than two hours to travel, even in the best of weather conditions. The hovercraft had a 100% success rate with 30 medical evacuations, while the road would be impassable for much of the year due to frequent icing, high winds, blizzards and other inclement weather. Pete Mjos, the region’s former U.S. Public Health Service director, has said that attempting to travel on the proposed road during the region’s extreme winter storms would be “foolish beyond reason” and “would clearly jeopardize life.”

The Aighleen Pinnacles in Izembek NWR (©John Sarvis/USFWS)

The best estimates suggest that between past efforts to enhance medical services to King Cove and the construction of the proposed road, the final bill to the American taxpayer would be close to $75 million, an extraordinary expense in a time of federal budget austerity. Two weeks ago, Defenders of Wildlife CEO Jamie Rappaport Clark and former Interior Secretary Bruce Babbitt co-authored an op-ed in the Washington Post that details the decades-long history of King Cove’s pork-barrel projects and the environmental consequences of this road.

Secretary of the Interior Jewell will face many tough decisions in her new position, but the Izembek road should not be one of them. While Izembek may be politically challenging to decide, from an economic and environmental perspective, it is easy and self-evident – the road must be rejected. We urge the new secretary to make the right decision – the honest and responsible decision – and preserve this iconic wilderness wildlife refuge. Both American taxpayers and the Izembek wildlife will thank her.

Jonathan Proctor, Northern Rockies Representative

I have some great news from Montana: All 14 bad bison bills in the Montana Legislature were defeated!

Legislators opposed to the recent progress on wild bison restoration in Montana (including the restoration of 61 wild Yellowstone bison to Fort Peck Reservation and the increase in tolerance for roaming bison around Yellowstone) made 14 separate attempts this year to legislate wild bison out of existence in the state. And 14 times they were defeated.

Some of the legislation never made it to committee. Some bills did, but then died in committee. Still others made it through committees and one or both chambers, but not through the appropriations process. Three, however, passed through both houses and were sent to Montana Gov. Steve Bullock. If even one had become law, it would have seriously harmed or even ended our bison restoration work.

But thanks to you and many others who contacted the Governor in support of wild bison, he vetoed all three bills that made it to his desk. He vetoed the first one on April 22, and the final two were vetoed just last week. Please take the time to thank him right now with a quick email, a tweet or a post on his Facebook page.

©Diana LeVasseur

You may recall these bills from my previous blogs. The bills varied in specifics but all were meant to stop wild bison restoration. One would have allowed county commissioners to veto bison restoration anywhere in their counties, even on federal land or tribal land. Another would have allowed landowners to shoot all bison that step on private property as they wander out of Yellowstone National Park. Another would have forced state officials to remove or kill all bison that cross the imaginary Yellowstone boundary. Yet another would have banned bison restoration altogether.

Now, all 14 bills are just bad memories.

Defenders worked tirelessly with our tribal and conservation allies – and with you, our members – to make this happen. My favorite part was working with several tribes to organize and attend a rally they held inside the capitol building rotunda. The event included a drumming circle that reverberated throughout the building and the capitol’s first-ever pipe ceremony. I also thought the full page ad that several tribes placed in many Montana newspapers was very effective. It generated a lot of calls, and a copy was placed on every legislator’s desk just as several of the most damaging bills were coming up for major committee votes.

Although having to spend time fighting bad bills seems like a waste of time and money, it may prove beneficial in the long run for wild bison restoration. Bison supporters – tribes, hunters and conservationists – are working together now on bison conservation more than ever, and many tribes seem more eager to restore wild bison. More Montanans have heard about this issue as a result and are overwhelmingly on the side of wild bison.

Thomas Christian, member of the Fork Peck Assiniboine and Sioux Tribal Council, emceed the rally in Helena.

Thank you to everyone who worked together to defeat these bills, especially representatives of the Assiniboine, Gros Ventre, Sioux, Salish, Kootenai, Nez Perce, Crow and Blackfeet Tribes; the Native American Caucus; tribal organizations like Montana-Wyoming Tribal Leaders Council and InterTribal Buffalo Council; hunting organizations like Gallatin Wildlife Association; lobbyists Ben Lamb and Jake Troyer; and conservation organizations including World Wildlife Fund, Buffalo Field Campaign, and National Wildlife Federation.

And thank you to our Montana members who contacted our state legislators, and all Defenders’ members for the support you’ve provided that makes outcomes like these possible. We can all breathe a sigh of relief (for now) and celebrate, knowing that bison still have a bright future in Montana. The legislature won’t meet again until 2015, and by then we hope even more Montanans will support the return of wild bison.

Letts Lake, Mendocino National Forest (©Pamela Flick/Defenders)

Pamela Flick, California Representative

From the thundering rapids of Cache Creek to the snow-capped peak of Snow Mountain, northern California’s somewhat undiscovered Berryessa Snow Mountain region is home to iconic wildlife, including the rare and elusive Pacific fisher, thriving elk herds and one of our state’s largest wintering populations of bald eagles. Visitors from nearby Sacramento and San Francisco Bay Area encounter scenic vistas and a wide variety of rare species found nowhere else on Earth, thanks to the region’s distinctive geology.

Indeed, this rich landscape provides habitat for so many plants and animals – among them some of the most unique butterflies and dragonflies in the state – that it has been identified as a “biodiversity hotspot.” The lands between Lake Berryessa and Snow Mountain make up one of the largest tracts of relatively undisturbed public lands in the state, providing invaluable space for wildlife to roam. Spanning nearly 100 miles in length from north to south, and ranging from near sea level to over 7,000 feet in elevation, this landscape includes habitats at such a wide variety of altitudes and latitudes that it also presents an important opportunity for species to adapt as the climate continues to change.

Building on overwhelming support from a wide array of stakeholders – from business owners to local elected officials, wildlife enthusiasts to mountain bikers – Representatives Mike Thompson, John Garamendi, Jared Huffman, Anna Eshoo and Ami Bera, along with Senator Barbara Boxer, recently introduced the Berryessa Snow Mountain National Conservation Act (H.R. 1025/S. 483) “to conserve, protect and enhance for the benefit of present and future generations the ecological, scenic, wildlife, recreational, cultural, historical, natural, educational, and scientific resources of the lands.” These bills would designate nearly 350,000 acres of federal land managed by the Bureau of Land Management, U.S. Forest Service, and U.S. Bureau of Reclamation as a National Conservation Area.

Fishers, an elusive and imperiled species, make their home in the Berryessa Snow Mountain region.

With nearby metropolitan areas expected to gain millions of new residents within the next decade, roads and development threaten to fragment this largely unbroken expanse and limit wildlife movement. The impacts of poorly managed recreation can also threaten important habitat. Protecting the Berryessa Snow Mountain region will safeguard the natural beauty, sensitive areas and the plants and animals that make their homes in this unique landscape. Protection will also secure existing recreation opportunities like hiking, boating, camping and horseback riding, while providing well-managed recreation experiences for residents and visitors alike.

Permanent protection for the Berryessa Snow Mountain region isn’t just good for the environment and wildlife, it’s also good for the economy. The outdoor recreation industry supports more than 400,000 California jobs and generates $46 billion (yes, that’s billion with a b!) of economic activity in the Golden State every year. Protecting our special places encourages tourism, supports local businesses and creates desirable places to live and work. Riffing on the old adage, protect it and they will come!

From meeting with key decision-makers to hosting town hall meetings with our conservation partners to engage local community stakeholders, Defenders is committed to continuing our work to support permanent protection of the Berryessa Snow Mountain region to ensure that wildlife as well as future generations benefit from this unique and diverse landscape just as we do today.