photo credit: Montana Public Radio

As we grow older and become more mature, we hopefully come to the realization at some point that life is not always about ‘me.’ We are not the center of the universe. Our arrogance, our stubbornness and our pushy, greedy, self-centered approach can only take the joy of living so far. There are lives and causes outside of ourselves that demand attention. As we spend time rotating on this Earth, responsibilities befall all of us to think about, care about, and act upon issues that make this life worth living. This was the mindset during the formulation of Earth Day 1970, driven by the awareness that our societal behavior and actions were taking a toll on our natural systems, and that a change was needed.

Fifty-three years ago, Earth Day became a thing. Who would have thought that, this many years later, we would recognize that the need is greater than ever. In the year 2023, there is no better place to honor this anniversary than right here in Bozeman, the Gallatin Valley, and the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem (GYE). The GYE is the largest temperate zone landscape in the lower 48 states, and it is in trouble. This year, Gallatin Valley Earth Day decided to center the attention on wildlife, and the Gallatin Wildlife Association (GWA), one of the many sponsors of the event, is glad they did. Our wildlife (I don’t mean that in a possessive sense) is intrinsic. Wildlife belongs to planet Earth, to itself, and like all of us, wildlife has a reason for being.

We’ve treated our intrinsic wildlife poorly over the decades. We’ve taken them for granted and made decisions on the landscape for our future, but not necessarily for theirs. Our needs, wants and desires came first. Yet, the grizzly bear is a prime example of an iconic species that has fought back from the edge of extinction, primarily due to its protected status under the Endangered Species Act. With that success, we still believe they are not a recovered species, not yet. Current and future threats are aligned against them more than ever. Unless we do something different, unless we change our behavior, the grizzly bear will decline, and could essentially be extirpated from the region as we know it. So we ask, what does the future hold for the grizzly bear?

This is the story that needs to be told because it is timely. It is timely because the state of Montana is currently formulating a new statewide grizzly bear management plan. It is timely because currently petitions from three western states (Montana being one of them) are urging the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to review and remove protective status from the Great Bear. If there ever was a more iconic species to showcase the need for Earth Day 2023, the grizzly bear would be it, for it highlights the continued need for protection.

So, what does the future hold for the grizzly bear? This was the topic at the February 1st presentation at the Emerson Center by author Todd Wilkinson and Dr. Chris Servheen. The highlight of the night was knowing and learning that as long as the population in the state of Montana, and more specifically, Gallatin County, continues to expand, it does not bode well for the bear. That increased population dynamic comes with a fairly heavy price tag. Increased tourism and growth will materialize into increased human/bear conflicts. The increased popularity of the region will transpire into an increase in habitat fragmentation, recreation, and exploitation, all of which diminishes the bear’s ability to roam freely upon the landscape, achieve connectivity, look for additional food sources, and search for cooler climes during a time of climate change.

In a recent Guest Opinion to the Bozeman Chronicle, GWA laid out a few facts:
1. “…more than 70% of grizzly bear deaths result at the hands of man. Some references report that number as high as 77-90% of deaths, with only 12% of deaths occurring naturally.”
2. “Many grizzly bear deaths are resulting from actions taken in the name of conflict resolution, vehicle-wildlife collisions, habitat fragmentation, and the more recent deaths from highly pathogenic avian influenza. Climate change will complicate and exacerbate this issue before us.”

This mortality rate does not include deaths resulting from recent regulative changes in hunting and trapping as a result of political influence in the state legislature. Yes, those changes have and will increase the likelihood of indiscriminate deaths. And if the wishes and desires to eliminate federal protections by the state of Montana and other western states come to fruition, the grizzly bear will ultimately face the threat of trophy hunting. This is the bear’s future. It doesn’t have to be this way, but this is the trend the bear is facing unless we change our behavior.

The current protective status of the grizzly bear is helping to maintain the bear’s population, such as it is. It is easy to sit back and look at the bear’s population and distribution and say the bear is recovered, but population numbers don’t tell the whole story. The current protective status of the grizzly bear is the strongest vector the bear has on its behalf. Because of federal protections, the law provides some safe harbor. But, look at the forces aligned against them. All of the anthropogenic and climatic vectors are not containable or mitigable. Why? Because we don’t have control over natural systems. We don’t even have complete control over ourselves. We use the formidable argument that we know best. Our arrogance, once again, is thinking we understand all natural systems, failing to realize we don’t.

Those in the environmental community argue the bear’s protective status is contingent upon genetic connectivity. It is feared that grizzly bears, especially those in the GYE, will become genetically isolated, not reaching connectivity with other grizzly bear populations. Of the six recovery zones in the Pacific Northwest and Northern Rocky Mountains, only two have substantial populations, and those populations are not genetically connected. There is a concern that until that goal is reached, the grizzly will genetically decline over time, thus weakening the health and genetic vitality of the bear.

Using an analogy to the “State of the Union” address, the state of the grizzly bear in the lower 48 contiguous states is “being maintained” for now, but ominous clouds are on the horizon. But we must be clear; maintaining is not the same as sustaining. Grizzly bear connectivity must be reached at some point in time. Grizzly bear habitat must be protected, not chipped away, and we must stop using the rationalization during destructive forest projects that individual bears may be harmed, but the population will endure. This double talk occurs all too frequently during the expression of biological opinions and in environmental assessments. It’s an example of how we allow a death by a thousand cuts. At some point, individual grizzly bears become the population. How many cuts become too many?

Removing federal protections for the grizzly bear is like removing a life preserver from a drowning victim. To claim that each state can manage its own wildlife is a great soundbite, but where is the evidence? In Montana, the Department of Fish, Wildlife and Parks and the Montana Fish and Wildlife Commission have not shown the maturity and responsibility to manage wolves well. As long as the interest and the desire to kill predators is stronger than the desire to protect them, our large carnivores are in need of help, and the biodiversity of this planet is at risk.

What is the future of the grizzly bear? That future depends upon us. We need to change our behavior. We need to realize we are not alone on this rotating Earth. Other life forms and other lives depend upon us. When will we reach the maturity to recognize that? When our arrogance and self-centered approach comes to an end. Only then will the grizzly bear be a recovered species. Until then, the grizzly bear will be the poster child for Earth Day 2023.

Clint Nagel is President of the Gallatin Wildlife Association located in Bozeman. Its mission is to be a voice for all wildlife, and to do so on the basis of the best available science, the law and the ethical treatment of wildlife.