The proposed USFWS North Cascades Grizzly Bear Recovery Zone encompasses millions of acres in Washington State, including established National Parks and Wilderness Areas, National and State Forest land, municipalities and towns, recreational facilities such as ski areas and campgrounds, and tens of thousands of acres of private property. The designation will have serious long term impacts on natural resource and land management decisions in Washington State for generations to come.
Please keep the following definition in mind as your review the rest of this article…
gerund or present participle: REWILDING
restore an area of land to its natural uncultivated state (used especially with reference to the reintroduction of species of wild animal- usually a large carnivore, that has been driven out or exterminated from a particular region).
Designating millions of acres as a “North Cascade Grizzly Bear Recovery Zone”, whose outline includes numerous towns and tens of thousands of acres of private property, is yet another example of how the Endangered Species Act has been misused to promote range expansion for a non-endangered species.FACT: Ursus arctos (the North American Brown or common “Grizzly” bear) is listed as a “Species of Least Concern” by the IUCN. The species, which includes all of it’s recognized sub-species, already enjoy one of the largest [most extensive] circum-polar ranges of any large terrestrial predator on earth, (second only to the Gray Wolf).For the USFWS, NPS, or any State wildlife agency to determine the legal status of any species by comparing current range with estimated historic range or somebody’s idea of “desired” range, ignores factors such as real population levels, actual and perceived threats, projected future trends, the requirements of and impacts on other species, compatibility with human activity, human settlement, and human values.Whereas, the original intent of the Endangered Species Act was to insure the survival of specific species that faced a serious threat of extinction, there is no basis for using the law as a tool to promote range expansion for any non-threatened species, let alone a species as impactful as the Grizzly/Brown Bear.FACT: The “North Cascades Recovery Zone” in Washington State is NOT essential for insuring the long term survival of Ursus arctos.Designating millions of acres as a “core reserve” for this large non-endangered predator will have profound impacts on all current and future land management decisions, especially pertaining to timber management, fire suppression, road construction, water diversion, livestock grazing, hunting, and recreational activities.The designation [listing] of the Grizzly bear (and the Gray Wolf for that matter) as “threatened” or “endangered” makes a mockery out of the intent of the Endangered Species Act.Finally, upon the de-listing of the species, Ursus arctos (including all sub-species), I urge that a well regulated hunting season be implemented to control Grizzly Bear population densities and help insure that human/bear conflicts and impacts on other wildlife species are mitigated.
Comment ID: 1090841-77025/1611
This IUCN map pictured below, shows the extensive circum-polar range (mustard color) of the “Grizzly” or “Brown Bear”, (Ursus arctos). Granted, the species has been extirpated or exterminated from some portions of their historic range, however, according to the IUCN, the species is not even close to being threatened or endangered.
Non-endangered species such as the Grizzly Bear and the Gray Wolf are being used to control and restrict how our western lands are utilized. In view of all the scientifically verifiable facts regarding the health of Ursus arctos as a species, the sufficiency of their current range, and actual population trends, there is no scientific rationale for expanding Grizzly Bear range into Washington State.
The public comment period on the draft EIS is open until March 14, 2017. If you wish to leave a comment, click here, or go to