Grizzly Bear Recovery in the Contiguous United States
Author(s): M. Dale Strickland
Source: Bears: Their Biology and Management, Vol. 8, A Selection of Papers from the Eighth
International Conference on Bear Research and Management, Victoria, British Columbia,
Canada, February 1989 (1990), pp. 5-9
Published by: International Association of Bear Research and Management
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3872897
Accessed: 02/01/2009 16:23
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless
you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you
may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.
Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=iba.
Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed
page of such transmission.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit organization founded in 1995 to build trusted digital archives for scholarship. We work with the
scholarly community to preserve their work and the materials they rely upon, and to build a common research platform that
promotes the discovery and use of these resources. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].
International Association of Bear Research and Management is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve
and extend access to Bears: Their Biology and Management.
http://www.jstor.org
GRIZZLY
BEARRECOVERY
INTHECONTIGUOUS
UNITED
STATES
M. DALE STRICKLAND,Wyoming Game and Fish Department, 5400 Bishop Boulevard, Cheyenne, WY 82002
Abstract: The agencies responsible for the management of the grizzly bear (Ursus ar-ctos horribilis) have formed an interagency organization called the Interagency
Grizzly Bear Committee (IGBC). The Committee has developed guidelines for management of bears and bear habitat that are being applied in 4 of the 5 ecosystems
where populations of bears still exist in the contiguous 48 states. The Committee, through its members, has also endorsed and often funded research on habitat and grizzly
bear populations. The Committee currently has a task force assisting the U.S. Forest Service in their development of a cumulative effects model (CEM) that will use
existing data on habitat and bears to evaluate the additive as well as individual effects of various activities on bears. Research is needed to validate CEM components.
Additional research is needed on social attitudes toward the grizzly bear, aversive conditioning, physiological effects of handling bears and population genetics. Some
small populations may need periodic injection of new genetic material. A project evaluating population augmentation as a possible management tool to increase genetic
diversity and population size is planned in the near future. The Northern Continental Divide and Yellowstone populations appear secure and the former appears to have
reached a recovered level. It is important that the delisting process proceed in this population to confirm recovery, fulfill commitments to the public and assess our ability
to manage grizzly bears without the protection of the Endangered Species Act. It is also important to focus more attention on areas where the bear is less secure. While
past recovery efforts have concentrated on areas in the United States, it may be impossible to maintain a viable population in some border areas without including the
bears and habitat provided by neighboring Canadian provinces. To aid in this cooperation, the IGBC recently was expanded to include British Columbia and Alberta.
Int. Conf. Bear Res. and Manage. 8:5-9
The recovery of the grizzly bear is a tremendous
challenge. The grizzly is intelligent, sometimes ferocious, andat the apexof the food chain. At the sametime,
grizzlies arealmostgone fromtheirhistoricalrangein the
contiguousUnitedStates(U.S.), a victimof the tamingof
the Americanwest. Grizzlies exist only in the Yellowstone Ecosystem (YE) of northwesternWyoming, eastern Idahoand southwesternMontana,the NorthernContinental Divide Ecosystem (NCDE) in northcentral
Montana,the Cabinet/YaakEcosystem (CYE) in northwestern Montana and northeasternIdaho, the Selkirk
Ecosystem(SE) in northernIdahoandnortheasternWashington,theNorthCascadesEcosystem(NCE)in northern
Washingtonandpossibly the BitterrootEcosystem (BE)
in centralIdaho. Althoughthegrizzly is still protectedby
the federalEndangeredSpecies Act (ESA), competition
with man persists. Agencies chargedwith the managementof the grizzly andits habitathave developeda coordinatedapproachto management. The objective of this
paperis to describethis process,presentthe most significant results of this effort, and to provide recommendations for future bear conservation. I wish to thank the
manyagencies andindividualsthatassisted in the preparation of this paper and, in particular,C. Servheen, J.
Green and G. Contreras.
INTERAGENCYCOORDINATION
The Interagencyeffort began in 1974 with the developmentof anInteragencyGrizzlyBearSteeringCommittee (IGBSC) for grizzly bear investigations in the YE.
This Committeegrew out of the controversysurrounding
closing of dumps in Yellowstone National Park. The
Committee was composed of representativesfrom the
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), U.S. National
Park Service (NPS), U.S. Forest Service (FS), and the
statesof Idaho,Montanaand Wyoming. A StudyTeam
(IGBST)composedof representativesfromthe majority
of the IGBSCmembersandfundedby these sameentities
was begunin 1974 underthe leadershipof Dr. R. Knight.
The IGBSC functioneduntil 1983 when a memorandum of understandingwas signed by the cooperating
agencies and states creating the IGBC. The federal
agencies were expandedto include the Bureauof Land
Management(BLM) as a full memberand the Bureauof
IndianAffairs (BIA) as an ex-officio member. The state
of Washingtonwas also added. Committee members
include top level administratorsfrom each agency and
state. In 1987, the Canadianprovincesof BritishColumbia and Albertawere also invited to participate.
The IGBC is responsible for coordinatingresearch
and managementof grizzly bears in the contiguous 48
states. The Committee'sintentis to provideconsistency
in managementwithin and among ecosystems, to avoid
duplicationof research,andto maximizethe efficient use
of resources and personnel. IGBC responsibilitiesinclude implementing the grizzly bear Recovery Plan,
guiding andplanningagency researchdirection,making
joint recommendationsto federal agencies and states
regardinggrizzly bear managementand research, and
approvingor disapprovingactionsproposedby the various subcommittees.
Foursubcommitteeswereinitiallyformedincluding1
for researchand3 for managementissues. The Research
Subcommitteeconsists of agency scientists who advise
IGBCon researchprioritiesand proposedresearchprojects. The managementsubcommitteesinclude 1 each for
the YE andNCDE and 1 for the remaining3 ecosystems.
Managementsubcommitteesconsist of mid-level managers from member agencies who propose and imple-
6
BEARS-THEIR
BIOLOGY AND MANAGEMENT
ment managementactions and identify researchpriorities. A PublicInformationTaskForcewas establishedin
1984 andelevated to subcommitteestatusin 1986. This
subcommitteedeveloped a much needed communications plan for the committee and produces an annual
newsletter,GrizzlyTracks.
The IGBChas institutedan extensive public involvement/publicparticipationprogram. For example, in the
last 4 years we have held public meetings and listening
sessions in communitiesin Wyoming, Idaho, Montana
and Washington. We have also invited bear experts to
make presentationsand work on task forces.
Funding for our efforts has mainly come from the
individual agencies, although we have received donations. An agreementwas recently signed with the Fish
andWildlife Foundation(FWF),which will facilitatethe
acceptanceof gifts, grantsand donationsto be used for
grizzly bearrecoveryand conservation.
HABITATMANAGEMENTAND RESEARCH
Mappingof grizzly habitatis necessaryfor establishing a successful managementprogramand has received
priorityin habitatwork. Mappingof grizzlyhabitaton FS
landshas evolved froma habitatcomponentprocessto a
moreecological approach.Completemapsof vegetation,
animal food sources, and human activities are nearing
completion for the YE, NCDE, CYE, and SE. The
mappingprocesshas been startedin the BE andNCE and
shouldbe completedby 1992. Vegetationis classified by
cover type and successional stage (Despain 1986, Hadden et al. 1986). Animalresourcesbeing mappedinclude
ungulate seasonal ranges and trout spawning streams.
Mapping uses LANDSAT (satellite) imagery or aerial
photos combinedwith extensive groundtruthing.
A significantcontributionto bearmanagementin the
habitatarenahas been the developmentof the YellowstoneEcosystemManagementGuidelines(Mealey 1986),
which have recentlybeen expandedto the otherecosystems where grizzly bears occur (IGBC 1986). These
guidelinesaresignificantas they determinethe approach
managers should take with managementdecisions in
grizzly bearhabitat. The guidelines identify 5 management situations. The 2 most importantfor grizzly bear
includemanagementsituation1 (MS1) andmanagement
situation2 (MS2). In MS 1 areas, any conflict between
grizzlybearsandotherresourceusersis resolvedin favor
of the grizzly bear. In MS2 areas,grizzlies aredesirable
butconflictsareusuallyresolvedin favorof the otheruse.
MS2 areasare subjectto review and may be reclassified
to MS1 if it is determinedthey are key to the survivalof
a populationof bears. In any case, individualbears are
protected unless they are determinedto have reached
nuisance status and must be removed from the population. Althoughthere remainssome inconsistencyin the
application of these guidelines, their existence is extremelyimportantfor the conservationof the bearandits
habitat.
Research projects, recently summarizedby the ResearchSubcommittee,include44 ongoingprojects- 13 in
the NCDE, 9 in the northwestecosystems, 17 in the YE,
and 5 nonspecific projects. In all, 22 projectsaddressed
habitatquantity,14 projectsaddressedhabitattrend,and
28 projects addressed habitat quality. The Research
Subcommitteeidentified an apparentoveremphasison
habitat-relatedresearch and pointed out the need for
"synthesis"research,examiningthe underlyingrelationships among various aspects of grizzly ecology. Such
synthesisworkbegan in the YE with the developmentof
a cumulativeeffects model (CEM),a computerizedprocess for utilizing bear distributionand habitat data to
evaluatethe effect of proposedactivities. These models
havethepotentialto improvemanagementof bearhabitat
by evaluating additive as well as individual effects of
variousactivities.Forthe models to work,some assumptions mustbe madeaboutbearresponseto changesin the
environment.The IGBCfeels a priorityshouldbe given
to synthesisresearchdirectedat validationof the cumulative effects models.
In an effort to consolidatehabitatresearch,a habitat
symposiumwas sponsoredby the IGBC30 Aprilthrough
2 May 1985, on the University of Montana campus,
Missoula. Thirty-five papers were presented, which
representedthe state-of-the-artin habitatmanagement
andresearch. Approximately350 people participatedin
this conference.
POPULATIONMANAGEMENTAND RESEARCH
As withhabitat,bearpopulationinventoriesarenecessaryfor establishinga successful managementprogram.
Two basic approachesto population monitoring have
been used. In the NCDE, inventorieshave concentrated
on distinctstudyareaswithinthe entireecosystem. This
approachhas resultedin greatdetailon individualgroups
of bears. Slightly less than one-half of the NCDE has
been intensively studied. In the YE, the IGBST has
adopted an ecosystem-wide approach,which has provided considerableinformationabout the grizzly bear
over a broadarea,but samplesizes have frequentlybeen
small.
One importantdeficiency in populationmonitoring
has been the ability to measurepopulationtrend. This
deficiency is not due to lack of effort. Harris (1986)
GRIZZLYBEAR RECOVERY
IN THECONTIGUOUS
U.S. * Strickland
provideda comprehensivereview of currenttechniques.
Until a better method is developed, the approachproposed by the MontanaFish, Wildlife and Parksfor the
NCDE populationusing all available data (Dood et al.
1986) seems the best. Methodsfor estimatingpopulation
size andtrendincludethe following categories(National
Wildlife Federation1987):
1. Second-handreports;
2. Harvestdata indices;
3. Surveys using tracksand other sign;
4. Bait and scent stations;
5. Direct counts and generalcensuses;
6. Mark-recapturestudies;
7. Populationmodels.
Extremelyaccurateestimatesof bearpopulationsize
and trendmay never be possible nor are they necessary
for successful management. In recognitionof this, the
NCDE and YE ManagementSubcommitteeshave proposed additional parametersto be used to determine
populationviability in the currentdraftrevision of the
RecoveryPlan. The subcommittees,in conjunctionwith
the FWS, propose monitoringthe numberand distribution of females with cubs. The assumption is that a
populationshouldremainstableor increaseif the number
of known females with young in the populationcan supportknown mortality.
ACTIONS TO REDUCE BEAR MORTALITY
Managersmust deal with a variety of activities and
issues in grizzly bearhabitat. They include mineralextraction,oil and gas explorationand development,grazing, timbering,recreationandtowns. All of these activities can potentiallyconflict with bears. In addition,bear
researchhas, no doubt,createdproblemsfor some bears.
While grizzly bearreproductiveratesmay be affected
by some or all of these activities,theiroverridingimpact
is on mortalityrates. Much of the managementactivity
to date has been designed to reducemortality.
Craigheadet al. (1988) recentlycompiled537 grizzly
bearmortalitiesin the YE from 1959-1987. Legal mortalities accounted for 178 deaths with most of these
coming before 1972. Managementcontrol and illegal
kills were the next 2 most common causes of bear
mortality. Only 27 mortalities were confirmed from
naturalcauses. Mortalitiesdroppedoff dramaticallywith
the closures of huntingseasons in 1974 and 1975. Mortalitiesfrommost causes have remainedfairlyconsistent
since 1975 with the exceptionof illegal kills, which have
declined. This has occurredduringa periodwhenhuman
use has increased and bear numbers have apparently
increased.
7
Much of the public informationeffort by IGBC has
been designedto educateusersof the variousecosystems
on how to behave in bear country and on how bears
behave. The Committeehas developed the Bear Us in
Mind brochure and is adopting an Alaskan Be Bear
Aware brochureto help in this educationeffort.
Therehas been a majoreffort in a cooperativecleanup of the YE. The IGBCformallysupportedthe Gallatin
County/Hebgen Basin Refuse District's request for
$70,000 to assist in resolution of the bear attractant
problem in Gallatin County, Montanaand the town of
West Yellowstone. This effort involved cooperation
from the town, county, state and the National Audubon
Society and, in particular,A. Eno. In other efforts to
minimize bear/humanconflicts, the FS has made metal
storageboxes availableat frequentlyused campsitesand
meat poles at other sites.
IGBC memberagencies have adoptedthe use of area
closures in specific instances.However, the Committee
feels thatsurvivalandrecoveryof the grizzly bearin the
lower 48 statesdoes not dependon the eliminationof all
human activities from public lands or the closure of
massive areas. Rather,we have recommendedthe use of
small closures for a limited time.
Anothersignificantevent in the minimizationof bear/
humanconfrontationsin the YE occurredin 1985 when
the FS adopteda special orderdesigned to regulatethe
handling and storage of foods and refuse in occupied
grizzly bearhabitat.In addition,since 1983, all agencies
involved in the managementof the YE have cooperated
in a coordinatedinteragencylaw enforcementeffort. The
programis aimed at decreasing potential bear/human
conflicts as well as illegal killing and other humanrelatedgrizzly mortalities.
We have also recommendedmany studies in related
areas,includingtheeffects of backcountryrecreation,the
effects of roadsand vehicle use, and aversiveconditioning. Currently,there are 7 researchprojectsrelated to
populationmortalitiesin all ecosystems. The IGBCrecognized a need for researchinto alternativemanagement
techniquesfor dealing with problembears. Hunt(1984)
suggested aversive conditioning offered managers an
opportunityto conditionbearsto avoid humansandtheir
facilities. In 1986, the WyomingGameandFish Departmentbegana researchprojectevaluatingaversiveconditioning as a method to minimize human/grizzlybear
conflicts.
The IGBC evaluated whether supplementalfeeding
was requiredin the YE to increasereproductivepotential
and reduce mortalityby augmentingnaturalfoods and
drawing bears away from potential conflicts with hu-
8
BEARS
THEIR BIOLOGY AND MANAGEMENT
mans. To addressthis issue we appointeda Supplemental
Feeding Task Force. The consensus of the Task Force
was that supplementalfeeding was not necessary to
sustainthe populationat its presentlevel. Grizzly bears
in the ecosystem have an adequatenaturalfood supply
andhave existed withoutsupplementalfeeding for more
than 15 years. However,the Task Force recommended,
and IGBC concurred,that there may be some value in
using supplementalfood on a temporarysite-specific
basis anddirectedanevaluationof the feasibilityof using
small temporaryfood baits to draw bears away from
conflict sites. Limited field testing of this techniqueby
IGBST did not show conclusive results.
Presently, there are 32 ongoing research projects
endorsedby IGBC on bear populationsor individuals.
Researchareasinclude populationtrend,mortality,census, physiology and behavior.
Thereis a considerablebody of researchinformation
availableas a resultof otherresearchefforts outside the
auspices of IGBC. In 1986, IGBC contractedwith the
NationalWildlife Federationfor a compendiumof grizzly bear research.The GrizzlyBear Compendiumwas
published in 1987 and provides a bibliographyand an
abstractof all available informationon the biology and
managementof the grizzly bear in NorthAmerica. The
ResearchSubcommitteeis providingthe IGBC with an
annualupdateto this bibliography.
A MEASURE OF PROGRESS
To assess how far we have come with grizzly bear
management,I would like to referto the proceedingsof
the IBA meeting held in Calgary, Alberta, Canada,
November 1970. Cowan(1972) addressedmanagement
of bears in parksand protectedareas and indicatedthe
managementexercise could be summarizedin 6 areas:
1. Removal of all trashand garbagefrom access by
bears;
2. Intensivepublic educationand enforcementof
regulationsinvolving people - even to temporary
exclusion of hikersfrom some areas;
3. Special concernfor campgroundssuch as patrols
by night, driftfencing with electricalcomponents
and closing or relocatingcampgroundsthatappear
to be particularlyproneto bearcontact;
4. Researchin developing means to deterbears
from campsitesin similarsituations;
5. The provisionof temporaryfood supplementsin
areasremotefrom humanactivity;
6. The removalof bears.
Significantprogresshasbeenmadein theareasCowan
identified but much is left to be done. For example,
removalof all trashis impossibleandpubliceducationis
nevercompleted.Closingorrelocatingcampgroundshas
been only partiallysuccessful. Removalof bearsis perhaps the most controversialof Cowan's recommendations but,as he observed,necessary. To date,removalof
bearsfromthe Yellowstonepopulationhas been directed
at offending animals. As populations increase, sport
huntingwill againbe consideredfor populationmanagement so thatremovalof individualbearsmay preventthe
need for some futuremanagementactions. Bearsthatare
more aggressive and inquisitiveare likely to be the ones
thateventuallyget intotroubleandarealso most likely to
be the animals removed from the populationby sport
hunting.Sporthuntingremainsa viabletool in theNCDE
population.
FUTURE NEEDS
In the area of research, the IGBC favors synthesis
habitat research. Also, projects designed to measure
society's reaction to bears are not emphasized. For
example, surveys of public values and attitudes and
studiesof theeffectivenessof publiceducationeffortsare
needed. Morebaselinedatain the CYE,SE, NCEandBE
need to be collected. Additional research in aversive
conditioning is needed with emphasis on developing
alternative management techniques for dealing with
problembears. The genetic variabilityin bear populations shouldalso be determined.It may be thatwith very
small populations, animals may need to be added to
maintaingeneticviability;and,populationaugmentation
may soon be evaluatedas a managementtool in the CYE.
Finally,the effects of researchon bearsshouldbe considered.
Futuremanagementneeds areless clear. The FWS is
currentlyrevisingthe RecoveryPlan,which will provide
more clear-cutguidance for managementactivities. A
taskforce in 1983reporteda minimumof 130grizzlies in
the YE. A similartaskforce in 1988reporteda minimum
of 170-180 grizzlies, suggestingthe populationstatusin
the YE is improving. Recently, increasedreproductive
success, loweredfemale mortalityandan apparentrange
expansionsuggest the YE populationis approachingthe
recoverylevel. Populationdatain the NCDEsuggestthat
populationpresentlyis at recovery level.
It is importantwe proceedwith the delistingeffort in
the NCDE. This populationis an excellent choice for
testing our ability to manage the grizzly without the
protectionof the ESA. Populationrecoverytargetsare
muchhigherthannecessaryfor a minimumviable population and this populationalso extends into Canada,so
thereis some room for errorin management. Managers
GRIZZLY BEAR RECOVERY IN THE CONTIGUOUSU.S.
have made a commitmentto the public to recoverpopulations of grizzlies, and it is importantto recognize
success with delisting,andfulfill these commitments. It
must be understoodthatwithoutpublic supportthe grizzly bearwill cease to exist in most of its historicalrange.
It is also importantthatviable populationsbe delisted
so attention can be directed to those areas where the
situationis muchless stable- the SE, NCE, CYE andBE.
Much tougher decisions must be faced in these areas.
Some of these areasmay not be capableof supportinga
viablepopulation.InotherareasAmericanandCanadian
efforts need to be combinedto achieve a viable population. In thatregard,the Committeeis presentlyworking
with British Columbia on a joint strategyplan for the
NCE population. This documentwill be used as a template for othercooperativemanagementdocuments.
It is also importantto demonstratethatthe remaining
federaland statelaws exclusive of the ESA areadequate
to maintaina viable populationof grizzly bears. If they
are not, then they must be changed before other native
species become candidatesfor the ESA protection.
Finally,the IGBCwould like to thankthe membersof
this Association for your outstandingcontributionsand
requestyoursupportandguidanceas we worktogetherto
conserve the grizzly.
LITERATURECITED
of bears
COWAN,I.M. 1972. The statusand conservation
(Ursidae)of the world- 1970. Int.Conf.BearRes. and
Manage.2:343-367.
CRAIGHEAD, J.J.,
K.R.
GREER,
R.R.
KNIGHT, AND H.I. PAC.
* Strickland
9
intheYellowstoneEcosys1988.Grizzlybearmortalities
Wildl.tem.Mont.Dep.Fish,Wildl.andParks,Craighead
WildlandsInst.,Int.GrizzlyBearStudyTeam,Natl.Fish
andWildl.Found.12pp.
DESPAIN, D.G.
1986. Habitattype andcover type as a base for
grizzlybearhabitatmappingandevaluation.Pages230andK.E.Evans,eds. Proceedings
233inG.P.Contreras
grizzlybearhabitatsymposium.U.S. Dep. Agric.For.
Res.Stn.,Ogden,Utah. Gen.Tech.
Serv.Intermountain
INT-207.
Rep.
DOOD,A.R., R.D. BRANNON,ANDR.D. MACE. 1986. Final
thegrizenvironmental
impactstatement:
programmatic
Montana. Mont.Dep. Fish,
zly bear in northwestern
Wildl.andParks,Helena.287pp.
HADDEN,
D.A., W.J.
HANN, AND C.J. JONKEL.
1986. An
forevaluating
grizzlybearhabitatin
ecologicaltaxonomy
the WhitefishRangeof Montana.Pages67-77 in G.P.
- grizzlybear
andK.E.Evans,eds. Proceedings
Contreras
habitatsymposium.U.S. Dep. Agric.For.Serv.IntermountainRes. Stn.,Ogden,tJtah.Gen.Tech.Rep.INT207.
R.B. 1986. Grizzly bear population monitoring:
HARRIS,
Mont.For.Conserv.
currentoptionsandconsiderations.
Exp.Stn.,Schoolof For.,Univ.of Mont.,Missoula.Misc.
Publ.45. 84pp.
C.L. 1984. Behavioralresponsesof bearsto testsof
HUNT,
and aversiveconditioning.M.S.
repellents,deterrents,
Thesis,Univ.Mont.,Missoula.274pp.
INTERAGENCYGRIZZLY BEAR COMMITTEE.
1986.
Interagency
grizzlybearguidelines.U.S.For.Serv.,Missoula,Mont.
100pp.
MEALEY,S.P., ED. 1986. Interagencygrizzly bear guidelines.
U.S.Dep.Agric.For.Serv.,Bur.ofLandManage.,Id.Fish
and Game,Mont.Dep. Fish, Wildl.and Parks,Wash.
GameDep.,Wyo.GameandFishDep. 99 pp.
NATIONAL
WILDLIFE
FEDERATION.1987.
Grizzly bear com-
GrizzlyBearComm.540pp.
pendium.Interagency