|
Grizzly delisting meeting draws fire - By Regina Purcell
This document was published online on Wednesday, January 11, 2006
More than 200 ranchers, residents and representatives of environmental groups from around the West converged at Cody Auditorium on Tuesday night to discuss grizzly bear delisting.
While numerous comments favored delisting the “symbol of the West,” as the grizzly was frequently called, a majority of public comment came from people who oppose the plan.
Their reasons against were a continuing theme that the delisting plan, 30 years after the grizzly was placed on the Endangered Species Act, is premature, lacks funding and does not allow for habitat to ensure the beasts continue to thrive.
“Just because they've left the intensive care unit doesn't mean they are ready to leave the hospital,” said Fred Smith of Jackson, who opposes delisting.
The main complaint, however, was that the meeting was in Cody and that it will be the only official public hearing in the nation about the delisting plan. (Open houses are being conducted this week in Jackson, Bozeman and other locations.)
Chris Sverheen is the grizzly bear recovery coordinator with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service in Missoula, is heading up the delisting process and has been involved for 25 years.
He said Cody was chosen as the public hearing site because it's a central location. While the hearing was limited to 7-9:30 p.m., he said everyone who wanted to was able to comment.
He denied an accusation that a “congressional delegation” from Sen. Craig Thomas' office forced him to allow everyone to comment.
“That was my decision,” he said. “At 9 (p.m.), there were two names left (to speak) and I decided to go beyond the time limit and allow that. There was no intervention,” he said.
He also said public comment for proposed delisting started in mid-November and continues to mid-February, and all comments - whether received online, in written form or at the public meeting - are considered equally. He said they will code each comment with its reoccurring theme to help make the decision whether or not to delist the grizzly.
Everyone signed into the event and those who wanted to comment put their name in a box. Five speakers were chosen at a time and people had three minutes to comment.
Several groups of people against delisting came from Jackson, and Rapid City, S.D. Many, who were for delisting, lived in bear country and relayed their personal encounters.
Tom Bales, a South Fork rancher who spotted eight grizzlies on his property last fall, choked up a bit when he said a grizzly killed three of his daughter's 4-H lambs.
“The big thing that worries me is the kids on the valley floors doing their chores and a grizzly is sitting there,” he said. “Do we have to have a kid get killed?”
Dave Vaug han of the Fremont County Farm Bureau echoed that comment.
“Grizzlies and Girl Scouts don't mix,” he said. “When you put bears in, multiple use suffers.
“When the parks were set aside by Theodore Roosevelt it was for use (by) people, not grizzly bears.”
Most opponents said it's premature to delist the grizzly from the Endangered Species Act.
Several said one-third of grizzly habitat is not protected under the proposal, that it will cost an additional $1.2 million to implement monitoring after delisting, and that cutthroat trout and white bark pine are in decline so grizzlies will lose their food sources.
Chuck Neal of Cody, a biologist who opposes delisting, said habitat quality is declining “and will get worse. All viable land must be available” to grizzlies.
Todd Jones, president of the Wyoming Outfitters & Guides Association, disagreed and said bears are resilent creatures.
“Goals have been met and those of us who live with grizzlies day to day know their (ability) to find food,” he said.
Several also asked that the Forest Service's proposed management plans for public lands be in place before delisting.
A couple of opponents also asked that an emergency plan to re-list the bear be in place in case its numbers start a rapid decline.
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service wants to establish a distinct population segment in the 9,200-square-mile Yellowstone Recovery Zone. It includes Yellowstone Park, a portion of Grand Teton Park, Rockefeller Parkway, sizable contiguous portions of the Shoshone, Bridger-Teton, Targhee, Gallatin, Beaverhead-Deer Lodge and Custer national forests, BLM lands, and surrounding state and private lands.
Delisting will not change the threatened status of remaining grizzly bears in the lower 48 states, which remain protected under the Endangered Species Act.
There also was disagreement on how many grizzlies are in this area. Sverheen says there are about 600, but opponents said those numbers are wrong because it's nearly impossible to count the bears.
Sverheen said since the animal was listed its numbers have tripled.
Still, Kate Drexler of Jackson said, “We need to stay the course. Too many threats remain.”
If delisted, management would be turned over to Wyoming, Montana and Idaho, which lie within the recovery zone.
About 6 million acres, including Yellowstone's 2.2 million acres, would be designated a high priority bear habitat called the Primary Conservation Area (PCA).
Outside the PCA, bears would be allowed to live where there is “suitable habitat” and “social acceptance.”
Outside the PCA, states will be allowed to set up limited hunting for grizzlies.
Sverheen said he was happy with the response Tuesday.
“It's just what we wanted,” he added.
|
Popular Searches