Outdoors: Important hearings on grizzly bear delisting coming up this month

Public hearings are coming up on the controversial Northern Continental Divide Ecosystem grizzly bear population administrative rule.

The rule will provide a regulatory framework for the NCDE population objectives outlined in the conservation strategy recently completed by the NCDE subcommittee of the Interagency Grizzly Bear Committee.

The NCDE conservation strategy identifies a demographic monitoring area, or DMA, that is home to the core population of grizzly bears in the NCDE. The DMA is comprised of the primary conservation area, which includes Glacier National Park and parts of five national forests including the Bob Marshall Wilderness Complex, and an area identified as zone 1, which is a buffer zone outside the primary conservation area.

The objective in this area, as detailed in the conservation strategy, is continual occupancy by grizzly bears, which will require maintaining good habitat conditions and adhering to population criteria.

Precise population estimates are difficult to obtain. The population objective for the DMA aims to continually maintain a population size above 800 bears with at least 90 percent certainty. Effectively, this would mean managing for a population of approximately 1,000 grizzly bears in the DMA.

Now, being a huge advocate of grizzly bears, and of Montana, I have read the proposal cover to cover, not once, but twice. And, this is only my opinion, but I have major concerns about delisting the Northern Continental Divide population, just as I had major concerns with the delisting of the Yellowstone grizzly.

And before I go any further, let me just be frank and clear — my concerns with delisting the grizzly bear in Montana have absolutely nothing to do with the hunting issue. I have always been, am, and will always be an advocate of hunting and conservation. I am a conservationist, and Montana's wildlife populations will always be of the utmost important to me.

So, having said that, my concerns over the delisting of the grizzly bear population in Montana are much more simple: the numbers, and how I am reading this proposal — and what I'm seeing and have learned of the grizzly bear while living with them in Montana for 43 years — just don't add up to me.

In other words, it's simple mathematics. I just don't understand how, based on the numbers I am seeing, and the baseline numbers for what a healthy grizzly bear population in Montana should be according to the current proposal, is a positive one.

Now I do understand that, and many will argue that, the fact we're seeing more and more grizzly bears in places like the plains outside of Great Falls, or all along the foothills of the Rocky Mountain Front, or in folks' backyards, is a clear indication that the grizzly bear has recovered. And in one respect, I do not disagree. In fact, I agree that the grizzly bear population has recovered to the point that, it wants to reclaim much of its original range and habitat.

So I guess, from that standpoint, the question I have is another simple one: Is that such a bad thing?

Is it a bad thing that grizzly bears are pushing back into their more natural home ranges? In these modern times, have we not learned how to co-exist with grizzly bears? We've had a long, long time to figure it out. It just seems to me, that, if, we've spent the last 30-40 years learning, molding and shaping ways to completely co-exist with grizzly bears inside the boundaries of Yellowstone and Glacier National Park, where tourism is at an all-time high, why can't we apply those same lessons to the grizzly bears that want to live outside of the national parks?

Now, don't get me wrong, I know it's a bit more complicated than that. I know ranchers and farmers have a much separate set of circumstances when it comes to co-existing with grizzly bears. I fully understand it’s complicated, and I fully understand that at times the grizzly bear can be invasive and problematic to livestock and crops. I understand. But there are methods in place for managing those situations, and I think, in time, the methods and strategies to help us co-exist with grizzlies will only continue to get better and better.

So don't misunderstand me, I see both sides of the issue. Actually, I see every single side of the issue.

But for me personally, I guess it comes down to one simple thing, I don't want to see the grizzly bear's role in Montana diminish again. I am a child of the time when the grizzly bear was added to the Endangered Species List. I have lived through the grizzly bear's fall and rise again, and, what I do not want to see is the grizzly bear fall again. I don't think that's good for our environment and the bear itself, and I especially don't think that would be a good thing for Montana.

No one will be able to convince me that, a significant drop in the grizzly bear population is a positive thing. Call me stubborn, but I won't ever be convinced of that, and that is why I continue to be at least skeptical of the delisting issue.

Now, if Montana comes up with a plan, one that I can read, understand and make sense out of, one that shows me that, massive fall in the grizzly population is not something that could happen, then I will be all for it.

But for now, with the current plan for delisting, and with the mortality rate I'm seeing from this summer, I remain nervous and not optimistic about the delisting of the NCDE population. Something just doesn't add up. It doesn't feel right, and for me, and only me, it's not about politics or hunting, or any issue, it's simply a gut feeling I have that, if the NCDE grizzly is delisted under the currently proposed plan, I fear that much tougher times are ahead for the great bear, a bear that to me, represents Montana as much as any other symbol we have.

And with that said, whatever side you're on, and you certainly don't have to be on mine, let your voice be heard on the subject, either way. There will be four public meetings for Montanan's to speak on the issue, starting Sept. 18 in Great Falls. There is also a meeting Sept. 19 in Conrad, Sept. 26 in Missoula and Sept. 27 in Kalispell.