Grizzly. bear

SPOKANE — The forested mountains in and around North Cascades National Park in north central Washington state have long been considered prime habitat for threatened grizzly bears, so environmental groups are upset the Trump administration scrapped plans to reintroduce the apex predators there.

U.S. Secretary of the Interior David L. Bernhardt on Tuesday announced his agency will not conduct the environmental impact statement needed to move forward with the idea.

That drew rebukes from conservation groups, who have worked for decades to grow the tiny population of about 10 grizzlies in the vast North Cascades, where writer Jack Kerouac spent the summer of 1956 as a lookout for wildfires.

“Grizzlies have been an integral part of the North Cascades ecosystem for 20,000 years but are now one of the most threatened populations in North America,″ said Rob Smith, northwest director of the National Parks Conservation Association. “This purely political decision ignores science, Park Service recommendations and overwhelming public support.”

He noted that former Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke supported grizzly recovery efforts there before leaving the Trump administration.

In 2015, under President Barack Obama, the federal government began an environmental impact statement planning process on restoring the bears in the North Cascades.

Grizzly bears play a vital environmental role in the park and the broader ecosystem, Smith said. But there have been no verified sightings in the region in several years, raising concerns about their survival.

While Bernhardt pointed to local opposition to introducing bears into the North Cascades, Smith said a majority of Washington residents have supported the proposal in the past.

The Center for Biological Diversity also called the decision political.

“Grizzly bears only occupy less than 5% of their historic range, and the North Cascades presents prime habitat for grizzly bears,″ said Andrea Zaccardi, an attorney with the group. “Their recovery there is critical to the overall recovery of grizzly bears in the U.S.”

The center contends the North Cascades could support more than 700 grizzly bears over 9,000 square miles of habitat. About 41% of the recovery zone is within the national park, and about 72% has no motorized access.

But Rep. Dan Newhouse, a Republican who represents central Washington state in Congress, said local residents don’t want a larger population of grizzlies there.

“This announcement is welcomed by my constituents in central Washington who have consistently shared my same concerns about introducing an apex predator into the North Cascades,” Newhouse said.

Bernhardt’s announcement came at a meeting in Omak, Washington, 100 miles (161 kilometers) east of the national park, where opposition to the bears is strong.

Bernhardt said the Trump administration will continue to focus on growing grizzly bear populations across their existing range, which includes parts of Montana, Wyoming, Idaho and eastern Washington state.

The recovery of grizzly bears in the lower 48 states is already an amazing success story, the agency said.

The Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem has been the primary focus of grizzly recovery efforts to date, and grizzly populations have increased to about 700 bears there since the animals were listed as threatened under the Endangered Species Act in 1975.

The environmental group Conservation Northwest was disappointed by the decision, but did not think it was the final word on the bears.

“We are still confident they will be restored there,″ spokesman Chase Gunnell said.

Federal grizzly bear recovery plans are mandated by the Endangered Species Act and require grizzly recovery in the North Cascades, Gunnell said.

It is the largest federally designated Grizzly Bear Recovery Zone and the only such zone outside the Rocky Mountains, he said.

North Cascades National Park and surrounding back country areas also receive far fewer visitors each year than places such as Yellowstone or Glacier national parks, where the majority of the nation’s grizzlies roam, Gunnell said.

Despite the excellent habitat, recovery of the animals in the North Cascades will require that some bears be imported into the back country, Gunnell said.

Given their isolation from other grizzly populations, their very slow reproductive rate and other constraints, the tiny population of North Cascades grizzly bears is considered the most at-risk bear population in the United States, Gunnell said.

Grizzly bears were listed as a threatened species in 1975. They have slowly regained territory and increased in numbers in the ensuing decades.

An estimated 50,000 bears once roamed the lower 48. Government-sponsored programs led to most being poisoned, shot and trapped by the 1930s. Now the largest concentration of grizzlies, numbering less than 1,800, are around Montana’s Glacier National Park and around Yellowstone National Park.

Grizzlies did win a victory over the Trump administration on Wednesday. A U.S. appeals court ruled that a federal judge was right to restore protections for grizzly bears in the Yellowstone region of the Rocky Mountains, after federal officials sought to turn over management of the animals to states that would have allowed them to be hunted.

(15) comments


I'd like to see a few Polar Bears around..I bet that would stop the whining. I call the Bear Wanker. Oh, sorry.


The people who don't want the bears live in the area, those who do, do not. The locals won--this time--but the battle will never end because while they have lives and real jobs. the bear lovers have paid staff and nonprofit funding and will keep going until they get what they want. For them this a sport or hobby. Something they do to entertain themselves. The locals don't have the resources , time, or desire to make a constant political battle the focus of their life.

@the real JohnQPublic

Telling you how to live and what's best for you is the tyipcal liberal bullcrap agenda.


Well perhaps you shouldn't have moved to a place where Grizzly Bears are part of the native fauna.

@the real JohnQPublic

I don't live in the north cascades, Ifiber-Karen. I also don't tell those people how to live.


Well said!

Desert Dweller

These conservationists need to find something else to do.

Let's conserve the wilderness without endangering the population and their livelihood.


'Cause what fun is the wilderness if it's wild?🤔

Desert Dweller

You move out there and feed the poor bears then.


Why do you have such trouble understanding "wilderness?" No one lives there, by definition.

Desert Dweller

I have family living in the Tonasket area and up the Methow valley, they already have problems with cougars so you want them to have an apex predator in their backyard?

@the real JohnQPublic

You got that shit right. Wilderness doesn't have to be full of wild animals, just undeveloped roadless areas will suffice. According to Ifiber-Karen, it has to be full of reintroduced apex predators to be fun.

@the real JohnQPublic

Rob serves as the Regional Director of NPCA's Northwest Regional Office in Seattle, Washington.

SHOCKING!! Another Seattle liberal who's smarter than all of us telling us how we need to introduce an apex predator into our backyards for his greater good.


Washington has enough predators. Grizzlies are not threatened. Other wildlife will be affected..Wolves are enough!!


Excuse me?

Welcome to the discussion.

Keep it Clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
Don't Threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be Truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be Nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
Be Proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
Share with Us. We'd love to hear eyewitness accounts, the history behind an article.