ShareThis Page
US challenges part of ruling that blocked grizzly bear hunts | TribLIVE.com
U.S./World

US challenges part of ruling that blocked grizzly bear hunts

Associated Press
1208300_web1_1208300-fefbe75528f5488ab2e7e3df7f4cdef7
This April 29, 2019 photo provided by the United States Geological Survey shows a grizzly bear and a cub along the Gibbon River in Yellowstone National Park, Wyo. Wildlife officials say grizzly bear numbers are holding steady in the Northern Rockies as plans to hunt the animals in two states remain tied up in a legal dispute. (Frank van Manen/The United States Geological Survey via AP)

BILLINGS, Mont. — U.S. officials asked a federal appeals court on Friday to overturn part of a judge’s ruling that blocked the first grizzly bear hunts in the Lower 48 states in almost three decades.

The case before the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals involves more than 700 grizzly bears in and around Yellowstone National Park. It comes after a judge in Montana restored protections for the animals last September.

U.S. Justice Department attorneys said the judge was wrong to require officials to review the status of grizzlies everywhere before lifting protections for bruins in the Yellowstone region. They also rejected the notion that the bears’ long-term genetic health was in doubt.

But the attorneys did not challenge other concerns raised by U.S. District Judge Dana Christensen. That includes whether sufficient safeguards are in place to keep the bears from sliding toward extinction if states take over management of the animals.

The Fish and Wildlife Service “has accepted a remand in this case and is already working on some of the issues identified by the district court,” the attorneys wrote.

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

If protections are again lifted for the animals, jurisdiction over them would be returned to state officials — and hunting that has been planned in Wyoming and Idaho could proceed.

Christensen’s ruling blocked the two states last year, just as hunting was scheduled to begin. The hunts would have killed up to 23 bears, which state officials maintained was a sustainable figure given the size and expansive range of the animals.

Also Friday, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service released a report indicating grizzly bear numbers are holding steady in the Yellowstone area and elsewhere in the Northern Rockies.

More than 1,000 of the bruins occupy a vast swath of northwestern Montana that includes Glacier National Park.

The agency said both populations are biologically recovered after being decimated by hunting and trapping early last century. But the bears also experience high death rates amid conflicts with humans and livestock.

About 130 grizzlies roam areas of northern Idaho, northeastern Washington and southern British Columbia.

In his ruling last September that blocked hunting, Christensen said the struggle to return bears to some other areas of the Northern Rockies was not given enough consideration when officials decided to lift protections for Yellowstone’s grizzlies.

He noted an estimated 50,000 bears once roamed the contiguous U.S.

Categories: News | World
TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.