Doug's Blog

Rants from a renegade naturalist

Fall Plans and a Plea for Funding our August-December Activities

Fall Plans and a Plea for Funding our August-December Activities

Save the Yellowstone Grizzly, now a non-profit organization must accelerate its activism during August, as the Final Decision on Delisting is due in federal court August 30, 2018 in Missoula, Montana. We now must expand our activism to defend all grizzly bears south of Canada: the USFWS has begun the process to delist the Glacier ecosystem's grizzlies and the Yaak population segment of bears is threatened with a high-volume through-super-hiking trail. Among our projects, we plan to produce another series of short videos, this time featuring ethical hunters discussing the ethics of trophy hunting grizzly bears. Also, a general media campaign to advocate against delisting and trophy hunts and a final road show to Washington DC to generate national news attention. We will publish a pro-grizzly, anti-bear-killing article in the Daily Beast by Doug Peacock.

In order to accomplish these goals, we must raise sufficient funds immediately in order to begin. Please help us fight for Yellowstone’s grizzly bears. You can do so by clicking the “Donate Now” button. August will be a busy month. The survival of the Yellowstone grizzly population depends on all of us.

donate save the yellowstone grizzly

Here is a partial budget for our autumn activities:

View or Download, PDF

Learn more at savetheyellowstonegrizzly.org

Thanks for your thoughtful and generous support,
Doug Peacock

 

Continue reading
9056 Hits

High Volume Pacific Northwest Hiking Trail Not Suitable for Yaak Valley

High Volume Pacific Northwest Hiking Trail Not Suitable for Yaak Valley

I prefer to stumble through the woods slowly but others favor jogging and getting there fast. On a proposed northern route through the Yaak Valley of northwest Montana, a nationally-targeted destination would send all manners of hikers--ethical, experienced, and inexperienced--into one place grizzly recovery cannot afford a single mistake, a single messy campsite.

Hiking routes for humans range from game trails to the so-called high-volume industrial recreation super trails like the much touted and travelled Appalachian, Continental Divide and Pacific Crest hiking super highways, which are collectively called the “triple crown of long distance hiking.” They all have their place and uses. What may be practical for one popular region might be an abomination in a more remote area.

I’ve bushwhacked all my life, though as a writer, I can see the attractiveness of bagging one of those triple crowns: it’s a ready-to-go memoir with the mileage signs delineating the book’s structure. You could do it for a speed record or have mid-life crises along the way—making for a solid read.

The faint trials I bushwhack are less suitable for linear story telling and more a metaphor for tripping and exploring your way into the unknown, maybe during periods of seeking in your own life. All kinds of backcountry travel are appropriate at different stages of your life’s journey.

I remember when I first told my friend Rick Graetz, the fine photographer and publisher, about Rick Bass’ protectiveness of the Yaak’S roadless areas and its grizzlies. Graetz said he didn’t get it: The Yaak was claustrophobic, green, brushy, full of ugly mosquitoes with no views of distant peaks or snowfields. It’s not like a high ridge in Glacier or a vast meadow complex in Yellowstone crawling with wildlife.

Now the Pacific Northwest Trail Association (PNTA), along with USFS acquiescence, has proposed a nearly straight line route from Glacier Park west through critical habitat for the isolated Yaak grizzly population of perhaps as few as 19 bears with 2-3 females of breeding age. I happen to like grizzly bears and eventually cramming 4000 or more hikers per year through this tiny corridor will destroy the Yaak grizzly population; encounters along the trail are inevitable and almost always settled with the bear losing her life.

Also, the PNTA favors “going high,” for the views of which the Yaak Valley does not have. Why would a hiker on a 1200-mile journey seek to actively avoid the lowest elevation in the state, and the incredibly scenic Kootenai river, largest tributary to the Columbia, with its side waterfalls and ghost towns? My old friend, the late Chuck Jonkel, studied this problem because 28 miles of the proposed Yaak trail went through critical grizzly habitat. Chuck said a better, safer, more scenic route lay to the south, linking lookout towers by ridge tops with great views all along the trail.

People and grizzlies are incompatible because humans are ignorant of grizzly behavior; a charging mother grizzly is not necessarily a dangerous situation; I’ve been charged by sows almost two dozens times and merely stood my ground inoffensively. No bear has touched me. * Recently a Wyoming wildlife warden shot a killed a mother grizzly with three now-abandoned cubs. Fish and Wildlife officials along with the sheriff applauded the warden. As long as these false and misinformed views prevail, the Yaak grizzlies are doomed by this massive influx of hikers, many of whom will be armed.

Promoters of the high-speed trail cite Glacier National Park as a place where humans and grizzlies mostly get along. I filmed bears and worked as a lookout in Glacier for over a decade and one of the reasons people don’t run into bears all the time is because popular hiking trails often have an adjacent drainage that is without a trail. The grizzlies can get away. Like the North Fork of the Flathead or Many Glacier—there’s not a trail up every creek. The Yaak Valley trail will constitute much more of a defile inviting animal tragedy. It should be noted also that Glacier is a nationa park, with a huge protected land mass; the Yaak is not a park, or at least not yet.

Don’t build a high-volume super-hiking trail in the Yaak.

Write the Kootenai National Forest or the federal advisory committee.

This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it..

Doug Peacock
Montana

Continue reading
6494 Hits

Is Yellowstone's Grizzly Bear Population Doomed?

Legendary environmentalist Doug Peacock on what the removal of grizzlies from the Endangered Species list means for Yellowstone’s wilderness.

Is Yellowstone's Grizzly Bear Population Doomed?Is Yellowstone's Grizzly Bear Population Doomed? Men's Journal - 4/27/17

Continue reading
3572 Hits

Don't Delist the Yellowstone Griz (nor believe everything you read)

grizzlies 750

Two contrasting news stories about bears in the West were published on April 2, 2017. The first is a credible six-year scientific study of black bears by Colorado Parks and Wildlife. The second is a report from the Yellowstone Ecosystem subcommittee meeting of the Interagency Grizzly Bear Study Team in Jackson, Wyoming, featuring the head scientist spouting familiar political bullshit about too many grizzlies ever expanding their Yellowstone range.

 

The Colorado study documents rising temperatures, fewer days spent in the den, increased human conflicts, and dramatically decreasing female black bear populations in southwestern Colorado. Rising conflicts with bears eating human garbage does not mean the bear population is rising. Garbage, they conclude, is not addicting; bears go back to natural food when it is available. The key to bear populations is the carrying capacity: how much food is there, which is directly related to soil moisture and plant production that is, in turn, directly related to climate change and (by correlation) to drought and rising temperatures in the American West.

 

On the other hand, the Interagency Grizzly Bear Study Team in Yellowstone doesn’t believe climate change matters, writing in the Federal Register: “Therefore, we (The Fish and Wildlife Service) conclude that the effects of climate change do not constitute a threat to (the Yellowstone grizzly bear population) now, not are they anticipated to in the future.” Frank van Manen, head scientist of Study Team, says the grizzlies are expanding their range by 11 percent every couple years. Why? He says it’s because there are too many bears: “We are packing more sardines in the sardine can.” Van Manen thinks they are overflowing from the can into new territory where conflicts with livestock abound, and that today we are seeing the largest Yellowstone grizzly bear population size since listed as a threatened species in 1975.

 

This is bullshit. Climate change has already decimated key Yellowstone grizzly foods, especially whitebark pine nuts (which is now functionally extinct as a food source for bears), and has lowered the carrying capacity of the habitat through drought and rising temperatures (for a scientific discussion, click on the Grizzly-Sardine-Can link below).

 

Bears are ranging out of the Yellowstone core area, but it’s because there’s not enough food there. Hence, the density of grizzlies has decreased. The population of Yellowstone bears has not increased for 15 years and has probably declined since 2007—coincidentally the date of the tipping point for methane release in the Arctic, the commencement of abrupt climate change, and the sudden death of whitebark pine trees in Yellowstone. Is there any chance these events could be related? You bet your ass.

 

http://www.denverpost.com/2017/04/02/colorado-black-bear-management/ 

http://www.sltrib.com/home/5130361-155/grizzly-bear-habitat-to-expand-in

http://www.grizzlytimes.org/single-post/2015/12/17/Grizzly-Sardine-Can-Blues

 

Continue reading
4306 Hits

Delisting of Yellowstone Grizzlies Delayed

The US Fish & Wildlife Service (FWS) said on January 12, 2017 that it could take the agency another six months to finish reviewing 650,000 public comments submitted on the decision to remove the Yellowstone grizzly bear from the ESA list. Many of those 650,000 comments contain arguments, scientific and otherwise, about why the Yellowstone grizzly bear should not be delisted, especially because of the threat of climate change and an ill-advised trophy grizzly hunt. To review is to take another look, to evaluate. Does this mean the FWS would re-open its mind to those thousands of comments who argue the best available science says don’t delist the grizzly?

I can only wish this to be the case. The Endangered Species Act’s "best available science" mandate remains Yellowstone’s grizzlies’ best friend Whereas the past years’ Save the Yellowstone Grizzly campaign appealed to the White House, a fresh effort should be aimed directly at the FWS where some biologist are hopefully still weighing the best available science.

Our June 3, 2016 letter to President Obama included this statement:

"Unfortunately, the March 3, 2016, delisting announcement by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) came paired with an astonishing declaration in the Federal Register: 'Therefore, we conclude that the effects of climate change do not constitute a threat to the [Yellowstone grizzly bear population] now, nor are they anticipated to in the future.’"

That letter was signed by E. O. Wilson, George Schaller, Jane Goodall and Michael Soule—among the world’s most respected scientists.

I believe that now we should ask many, many other scientists, peers of those FWS agency biologists, to speak out on behalf of the best available science for Yellowstone’s grizzlies. This dialogue will take place in a public forum, as there is no official comment period remaining. Those who love wild nature as well as our grandchildren must fight to recognize and respond to the beast of out time—climate change, which is indeed probably also the key argument for not delisting the grizzly.

Call it peer pressure, but let’s give it a shot; we have nothing to lose unless it’s everything.

For the wild,

Doug Peacock

Continue reading
2267 Hits
Go to top